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

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

On Tue, Oct 23, 2012 at 02:40:39PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > 4. When/if consensus has been reached, the package can be orphaned by
> >    retitling and reassigning the ITO bug accordingly.

> I fear a bit the situation "nobody care enough to comment", being
> interpreted as lack of consensus. But I do think in that case we should
> _eventually_ allow the orphaning to happen (after all 1/0 > 3/1 ACK/NACK
> </joke>).
> Any suggestion on how to word that properly, without adding yet another
> timeout rule carved in stone?

I disagree on this point.  If you can't get anyone to ack that you should go
ahead with the orphaning, then the system is not working as designed and
consensus has not been achieved.  It's then incumbent on the person looking
to orphan the package to rattle the cage and get developers to pay

Steve Langasek                   Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS
Debian Developer                   to set it on, and I can move the world.
Ubuntu Developer                                    http://www.debian.org/
slangasek@ubuntu.com                                     vorlon@debian.org

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: