Re: [PROPOSAL v2] Orphaning another maintainer's packages
On Thu, Nov 1, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Russ Allbery <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> That's where nmus help. Someone that does care and does have the time
>> can go ahead and get the features interesting them (and likely many
>> other users) to work.
> That's only true if you're happy with all of the changes being reverted in
> the next maintainer upload.
> If you're not happy with that, then no, NMUs do not help with this.
> Rather, they are a passive-aggressive way of *forcing* a maintainer to do
> work to incorporate changes that they already decided they didn't want to
> incorporate. That may be appropriate if what's actually happening is that
> the package is orphaned, but when it's a disagreement over how the package
> should be maintained, it's more likely to just start a revert war, which
> doesn't make anyone better off.
Not if the nmu has a sufficient delay (DELAYED/10 or DELAYED/30 or
whatever would be agreed on). The maintainer can cancel things that
he doesn't like before they get uploaded.
Given a cancelling, it is then a problem for the contributor approach
in a way the maintainer approves, and if not and they continue to
disagree with the maintainer, then a trip to the Tech Committee.
Again, all of this is rather rare, and only done by a DD who knows the
consequences of his/her actions and who we're already trusting with
the power of nmu.
We should try to get out of the way of capable people trying to make