[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Development standards for unstable

Jeroen van Wolffelaar <jeroen@wolffelaar.nl> wrote:

> That said, I do believe that if a package is unpopular enough that
> nobody picks up maintaining it, even while it's orphaned, what the
> prospects of the package are, and how much use it has to prolong its
> life extraordinary. If you're sufficiently committed to a certain
> package, you can just as well adopt it after all.

Hm, well, no.  I do particularly care for one orphaned package,
lmodern.  But since it currently doesn't have any (real) RC bugs, I have
more important things to do than adopt it on behalf of the
debian-tetex-maint list (or talking Norbert Preining into creating it
from his texlive sources).  If any work is really badly needed, someone
of us will for sure step in;  but that doesn't mean that we're happy to
have the additional burden.  I'd rather have it marked as orphaned, so
that a new maintainer "candidate" can clearly see that it needs care,
than formally adopt it while we can in fact only care for RC bugs[1].

Therefore I don't think that merely being orphaned is a good criterion
for removal; especially not until we make sure that all unmaintained or
badly maintained packages are in fact orphaned.

Regards, Frank

[1] and the important one, which might turn out to be RC
Frank Küster
Inst. f. Biochemie der Univ. Zürich
Debian Developer

Reply to: