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

Re: [SUMMARY/PROPOSAL] Orphaning another maintainer's packages


thanks for the proposal. It looks good, generally speaking and being in
consent with the previous discussion we had. Some minor tweaks:

On 23.10.2012 11:27, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:

> 1. Someone opens an ITO (Intent to Orphan) bug against the package whose 
>    orphaning is suggested, with the 'serious' severity. ... The MIA team
>    should also be notified (by Ccing mia@qa.debian.org) if the situation
>    affects several packages.  

Given the procedure is about packages and not people as you pointed out,
Ricardo, on behalf of the MIA team commented [1] that it is pointless to
involve them in such cases.

> 2. The submitter should seek comments from the package maintainer 
>    (e.g., by sending a private mail notifying him/her of the process).

That's why I initially suggested to file a bug against the package and
not wnpp. Hence I believe this is redundant.

> 3. Debian Developers can then ACK or NACK the proposed orphaning (using
>    signed mails sent to the bug and to debian-qa@lists.debian.org).

The procedure includes a bug filed against the package, but replies
should be sent to debian-qa?

>    retitling and reassigning the ITO bug accordingly. It is recommended to
>    wait for at least a 3/1 majority between ACKers and NACKers (and to give
>    a couple of days for potential NACKers to speak up).

Gregely suggested a fixed timeout for NACKs, a voting period [2]. I
believe this is a good idea for both, positive and negative votes on a
submitted case.

[1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/09/msg00656.html
[2] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/10/msg00162.html

with kind regards,
Arno Töll
IRC: daemonkeeper on Freenode/OFTC
GnuPG Key-ID: 0x9D80F36D

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply to: