Re: Regarding unresponsive Debian maintainers
Kevin Mark <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Just a thought. How about setting up an aging system for who can fix the
> bugs. Give the maintainer N time period to act on the bug and then if
> the maintainer can not fix it or will not fix it, other folks who have a
> patch should be able to apply to fix it.
We already have this, and the time N is zero days. That is, as soon
as a bug has been filed you can freely figure out the fix yourself and
submit a patch to the BTS. (This is the subtext to my comments here:
instead of complaining about maintainers not fixing bugs, go fix
some. It isn't the maintainer's job to fix every bug, and if you want
to fix bugs--a very good thing to want to do--go fix em!)
> if the maintainer feels that the patch should not be applyed, there
> should some authority to hear the pros and cons of the issue and
> arbitrate the result--would that be the tech commity, app. manag.,
> RM or ?
We already have this, it's the tech-ctte which is there to mediate
technical disputes that developers cannot settle themselves.
> It seems that folks go MIA for legitimate reasons but the
> package suffers.
Yes, and debian-qa already has procedures in place for dealing with
MIA developers; either completely MIA, or developers who are not
maintaining a package at all while still doing other work.
What the present thread seemed to be about was maintainers who *are*
maintaining a package, doing uploads for it and so forth, but who are
not fixing very old bugs in the package.
> it seems like allowing someone to come in to fix a
> package or takeover a packages has to deal with the ego of the
Not really; if the point is a fix, post a patch to the BTS. If you
want to take over a package where the developer really has not been
uploading it, post a query to debian-qa.