Re: [SUMMARY/PROPOSAL] Orphaning another maintainer's packages
Gergely Nagy <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>Ian Jackson <email@example.com> 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
>filing an ITO.
AIUI, with the current proposal, as long as three DDs think it should be orphaned, the maintainer's objection is irrelevant.