On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 01:58:16PM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote: > > 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 > > attention. > On the other hand, it is already hard to find people willing to review > other peoples work. Mandating acks means trusting that there will be > enough manpower to review something potentially unknown. I can't see > that happening reliably. It also makes the process a whole lot more > complicated than it needs to be, No, it makes the process based on *consensus*, which is a minimum requirement. > which in turn allows the package to suffer unmaintainance longer, > decreasing the distributions overall quality. > As said elsewhere in the thread, the process needs to be easy and > efficient. Hunting ACKs is neither easy, nor efficient. The debian-qa list served this purpose fine for *years*. It's not acceptable to use handwavy assertions about manpower to justify an antisocial process. -- 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