Re: [SUMMARY/PROPOSAL] Orphaning another maintainer's packages - full maintainer without restrictions
On Fri, Oct 26, 2012 at 09:17:13AM -0400, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
> Russ Allbery <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > 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.
> Very much agree. I am much more likely to work on a neglected package if
> I can use the tools that I'm familiar with from my own packages. The
> prospect of having to reverse engineer the packaging before I can make
> any useful changes is very discouraging.
> I am *not* a DD, so I think I'm qualified to say that if the goal of the
> proposal is to attract new contributors to help with existing packages,
> being allowed to change the packaging style is crucial.
I strongly agree with what Russ Allbery and Nikolaus Rath wrote above. When a
package is clearly not maintained, then it should be orphaned, so that a new
contributor can become full package maintainer without any restrictions on the