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

Re: Too much disruptive NMUs



On Sat, 22 May 2010 19:20:42 +0200
Julien BLACHE <jblache@debian.org> wrote:

> Either it's a QA upload or it's a NMU, but it can't be "a bit of
> both".
> 
> If the package is effectively not maintained anymore, it's up to the
> MIA team to investigate and eventually decide to orphan the package.

Do we have to wait for the MIA team or is a complete lack of response
to a request to NMU in the BTS sufficient reason for someone who is
interested in the package to file the bug to orphan the package
themselves? As long as someone is interested in the package, shouldn't
an email to the MIA team be sufficient? Someone has to be fairly
interested in a package to consider an NMU in the first place.

Does the MIA team take note of the WNPP reports of recently orphaned
packages or is there a chance that an inactive maintainer whose only
package is orphaned and then uploaded using QA, could drop off the
radar of the MIA team? (Leaving the key in place but no packages.)

> This kind of NMUs don't help; they just help the unmaintained stuff
> fly below the MIA radar longer.

Agreed - so in addition to my last email, a QA upload like this, IMHO,
should make sure that the MIA team are aware. I'd assume that, once
contacted, the MIA team would be happy for the package to be adopted
whilst the rest of the MIA process goes ahead.

-- 


Neil Williams
=============
http://www.data-freedom.org/
http://www.linux.codehelp.co.uk/
http://e-mail.is-not-s.ms/

Attachment: pgp8sqncgcK7Y.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: