Re: [SUMMARY/PROPOSAL] Orphaning another maintainer's packages
Michael Gilbert <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 8:18 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> Okay, well, I guess I return to my previous statement, then. I don't
>> think your proposed solution will work for the more common cases.
> I respect your opinion, so I'm just curious which part do you believe
> won't work in common cases? It's just applying existing NMU rules with
> a little more liberalism to increase activity in under-maintained
> packages, so I personally can't see where it would break down.
Well, that's what I was trying to get at: I think your method puts too
many barriers in the way of someone who wants to take over an effectively
abandoned package. It also requires *more* skill than adopting the
package would otherwise, since you have to be good enough at Debian
packaging to make minimal chnages within some arbitrary packaging scheme.
In other words, it requires as much or more skill than doing NMUs, whereas
adopting a traditionally orphaned package is much easier.
Russ Allbery (email@example.com) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>