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

[Gergely Nagy <algernon@balabit.hu>]

Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:

> Whether a package is in need of greater attention is not a hard and
> fast objective thing.  It's to a large part subjective.  Perhaps the
> maintainer thinks it's more or less fine, or at least low enough
> priority that the problems are tolerable.

Then the maintainer has many options, including but not limited to
NACK-ing the ITO. One has a lot of possibilities even before it comes to
filing an ITO.

> It's one thing to say "this package is in need of attention which I am
> prepared to commit to providing".  It's quite another to say "this
> package is in need of attention but I'm not going to do anything other
> than say it's a problem".

There is, indeed a difference, but the latter allows someone else
(potentially a non-DD) to take over the package, and make it visible
that the package is in need of a new maintainer. That alone is already a
tremendous improvement compared to papering over the issue.

-- 
|8]