Re: [SUMMARY/PROPOSAL] Orphaning another maintainer's packages
On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 9:14 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> 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.
Don't we expect the same adaptability of anyone trying to become a
co-maintainer of any other package? Once someone has jumped all the
hurdles to become a DD, at that point, aren't they expected to be of
sufficient caliber and skill to be able to learn quickly and apply
themselves to hard(er) problems?
At one point, there were arguments on -devel against using git for
packages because it increased the learning curve and thus may reduce
potential contributors. This argument strikes me as quite similar.
I think we have to be able to expect ourselves to be able to adapt and
learn. If we can't do that, then we really weren't qualified, and we
should get out of the way of those who can.