Re: [SUMMARY/PROPOSAL] Orphaning another maintainer's packages
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
Le 25/10/2012 01:51, Steve Langasek a écrit :
> On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 08:38:19AM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
>> Le Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 09:46:08PM +0000, Clint Adams a écrit :
>>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 11:48:12AM -0700, Steve Langasek
>>> wrote:
>>>> Silence is not assent. That thread blew up because you
>>>> proposed a *broken*
>
>>> No, silence is an indication that you don't deserve any
>>> decision-making power.
>
>> while in general one can not make interpretation for silence, in
>> this particular case, I think that the absence of any reaction to
>> the proposition to orphan a package is actualy a clear
>> demonstration that the package is orphan.
>
> No. We're talking here about silence *from the entire Debian
> developer community* in response to a call for orphaning. That
> says nothing about whether the package is orphaned. It may just
> mean you've managed to send your request to the wrong place (or
> gotten it stuck in a mail queue somewhere).
>
Hi Community,
Is there anyone here who would actually bother (n)acking if I were to
propose orphaning, say, yorick-cubeview (assuming it was not one of
mine)? If I were to suddenly disappear from the scene, I 'd be quite
happy if just one DD would care enough to orphan it for me, not to
mention adopting...
Besides, orphaning is just a stage in the lifetime of a package. It's
not like it will need to see a shrink for the rest of its life to deal
with abandonment issues. The *original* maintainer can very easily
adopt it back, the same day or the next month.
So yes, I say long silence from the entire community *including the
package maintainer(s)* probably means it's safer to orphan the package
than not. I would probably send a few pings during the one month
period though. I would also be careful during vacation periods,
especially if the maintainer is not a DD and therefore can not easily
announce VAC.
Regards, Thibaut.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/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=zPJe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: