Re: removal instead of orphaning?

["Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo" <manuel.montezelo@gmail.com>]

2016-08-28 21:50 Sean Whitton:
> Hello,
>
> On Sun, Aug 28, 2016 at 10:13:44AM +0100, Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo wrote:
> > I think that one measure to improve the current situation is that, for
> > the people doing NMUs, to orphan the package when the number of NMUs
> > exceeds for example 3 or 5 in a row, or 1 year since the oldest NMU not
> > acked by the maintainers and there are bugs or reasons requiring new
> > intervention.  (Exceptions can apply if there are specific reasons to
> > avoid to do that, e.g. keep packages as part of a team).  With this,
> > future NMUs will be QA uploads.
> >
> > If there's a general agreement that this is a good thing, and somehow
> > becomes part of the NMU process or similar guidelines [2], it would help
> > to avoid conflicts.
>
> If you have time to make this idea into a patch, a bug against
> developers-reference would be a good place to discuss it.

I failed to do this in the last few weeks and it looks like the next
will be worse in terms of spare time, so I'll see what I can do, but I
cannot promise anything :-/

Also, I hoped to gather some feedback to the message at least, to see if
the above looks reasonable to most people.


Cheers.
--
Manuel A. Fernandez Montecelo <manuel.montezelo@gmail.com>