Re: Launching and l10n NMU campaign for the squeeze release cycle
Christian Perrier wrote:
> Despite the current incertainties about the planned release date, I
> think it is now time to launch the l10n NMU campaign for squeeze.
I agree that it's probably not a bad timing to start a l10n NMU campaign.
> The process is roughly the following:
>
> - warn the maintainer (through the @packages.d.o address) about my
> intent to build an NMU of the package, fixing all l10n bug reports
[...]
> Of course, at any time of the process, things may be negotiated with
> the maintainer, and adapted to his|her work process...including fully
> abandoning the NMU intent..:-)
>
> This time, I'll look closer at packages I intend to NMU. Probably
> those that are at the top of the list might be poorly maintained
> packages, or even abandoned ones. For the last NMU campaigns, I took
> care of even those packages, but, this time, I might consider asking
> for the package removal if it appears too buggy, useless, outdated, or
> whatever else.
Not a bad idea. Please do share the ones were you did not get any
maintainer response with the MIA Team even if you proceed with the NMU
so they can look into the specific reasons why the maintainer seems to
be inactive.
Also note that there is a process for tracking possible orphaning or
removal of a package by the QA Team which is called bapase [1].
Cheers
Luk
[1] http://wiki.debian.org/qa.debian.org/bapase
Reply to: