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

Re: Attempted summary and thoughts

On Tue, Mar 27, 2007 at 02:19:45PM -0400, Matthias Julius wrote:
> "cobaco (aka Bart Cornelis)" <cobaco@skolelinux.no> writes:
> >    Automatically orphaning such packages has problems as Russel pointed out,
> >    but a "needs co-maintainers"/"needs hijacking" list of packages where
> >    DD's can be more aggressive in jumping/taking over in seems a good idea
> >    IMO.
> You could allow and encourage NMUs for bugs of priority less than
> important that are more than 6 months old.
But then what happens in the case (that was already pointed out) where a
bug languishes without attention for a year or more, someone NMUs to fix
the bug and the mainainer immediately uploads to revert the NMU?  It
seems that there needs to be some way to handle situations like that.



Roberto C. Sánchez

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: