Re: Handling of (inactive) Debian Accounts
On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 00:43:27 +0100, Amaya <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> I think the difference is that the MIA process is too conservative,
> It starts off being polite, indeed. And patient. You never know the
> reason why a person is not so active anymore. Tbm gave a talk about
> how it is done and why it is done like that in Oslo, 2003
> (Debconf3). Worth seeing.
>> and does not require an positive action on the part of maintainers,
> Yes, it does. They need to fix their packages, or they get orphaned.
> When no packages are left, we talk to DAM.
This is the part I'm unsure about. I think, as che recently
mentioned, he has been missing for years. His packages were
properly orphaned, but the account cleanup never happened.
I am given the impression that the primary focus of the MIA
process is taking care of packages, not account cleanup.
I applaud the effort by the DAM's to gather the required
information on their own, taking the burden of writing whatever code
that needs be written, as opposed to asking the MIA folks to add
code/process over and beyond what they already do.
I like this scratching your own itch as opposed to telling
other people how they should do more work. This is the way free
software should work.
If the MIA people pro-actively add a process of sending
delinquent account details to the DAM's in order to seed the WaT
mails, I don't think this information would be discarded.
love, n.: When you don't want someone too close--because you're very
sensitive to pleasure.
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/~srivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C