Re: [SUMMARY/PROPOSAL] Orphaning another maintainer's packages - maintainer's objection
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 01:58:55PM +0200, Thibaut Paumard wrote:
> Le 26/10/2012 08:46, Bart Martens a écrit :
> > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 12:45:21PM -0400, Scott Kitterman wrote:
> >> Gergely Nagy <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: AIUI, with the current
> >> proposal, as long as three DDs think it should be orphaned, the
> >> maintainer's objection is irrelevant.
> > I would send a "NACK because the maintainer objects", and I trust
> > other DDs subscribed to debian-qa to do the same. The ITO
> > procedure is not meant to replace the TC handling conflicts.
> So why not agree now that the maintainer can veto the process?
Because this would raise the question "how long should we wait for the
maintainer to object or to remain silent". In obvious cases, for example when
the package has clearly not been maintained for years, then three ACKs from DDs
should be sufficient to orphan the package, so that the package can be salvaged
quickly, without pointless delay. In less obvious cases, for example when the
maintainer objects, I trust the DDs to send NACKs to the ITO, so that the
package is not orphaned forcibly.