new lilo package maintainer? (was lilo removal in squeeze or please test grub2)
On Mon, 07 Jun 2010 03:22:46 -0400 (EDT), sean finney wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 07, 2010 at 01:44:05AM +0400, William Pitcock wrote:
>> Have fun. When you have a release that actually has merit, it can be
>> reconsidered for inclusion in Debian.
>> In the meantime, the original plan continues.
> actually, i don't think you have any say about what software can and
> can not be in debian, that is the sole privilege of ftp-master. your
> options are (a) to claim you still want to maintain the package and
> continue to do so, or (b) ask for its removal by ftp-master. given your
> comments here i think if you were to claim (a) there would be a decent
> case for someone to take to the tech-ctte.
> ftp-master, if they're aware of this argument, may just say "why not
> orphan it instead?". but regardless, if someone else is interested they
> can just follow that removal with a new upload using their name as
> Maintainer, and then again it's up to ftp-master to accept or deny it.
> given that there may be an active upstream and maintainer, and the
> software is otherwise DFSG-compatible, i don't see why they would deny
> such a new upload.
> of course, it would be a lot nicer if you could just hand over the reins
> of the current package to those who have been asking for them, to avoid
> some un-needed overhead...
Perhaps I can offer a solution here. Since William obviously doesn't wish
to maintain this package any longer, I am willing to take over his
responsibilities as a Debian package maintainer for lilo under two
conditions: (1) The kernel team fixes bug number 505609, and (2) Debian
ceases its attempts to remove lilo from the distribution. What do you
say, William? Do you have any objections? Does anyone else have any
objections? If so, speak now, or forever hold your peace.
Keep in mind that I have never been a Debian package maintainer before.
This will be my first package. Please be patient with me as I "learn the
ropes", so to speak.
As for whether or not lilo continues to be offered as an alternate boot
loader by the Debian installer, that is entirely up to them. I would
think that the path of least resistance would be to maintain the status
quo, but if they want to remove lilo from the Debian installer menu
that's their call, as far as I am concerned. I just don't want to see
lilo removed from the distribution.
.''`. Stephen Powell
: :' :