[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Does a DD become solely responsible for abandonware in Debian?

On 18/10/06 19:50:05, Jordi Gutierrez Hermoso wrote:
My questions are these: is this a good idea?

Do you have a package that uses this functionality, something other than an example of the theory? Do you use this functionality in a useful way yourself?

Adding a package that has no direct user interface in the hope that someone will create a package that depends on yours is, IMHO, fruitless.

Is it a good idea to try
to Debianise a package with no real upstream authors?

If you can make use of the package, yes.

IMHO, the issues are:
1. How useful is the code?
2. How stable is the code - i.e. how many things are still tagged ToDo and how many "features" are either incomplete or non-functional?
3. How essential are the missing components, (if any)?
4. Have you found any bugs yet? Can you fix them?
5. How confident do you feel about working on the upstream code as-is? Note that it can take quite a while to build a new team. In the meantime, you will be responsible for fixing both packaging and upstream bugs.

I used similar criteria when I took over quicklist upstream.

If I did that,
would I or my sponsor become responsible for maintenance?

Yes, you. Your sponsor shares responsibility for the Debian packaging but you have the responsibility - as maintainer - of handling bugs. As you are unable to forward bugs upstream, upstream bugs remain your problem.

You might as well create a new upstream at somewhere like SourceForge using the GPL. This will help attract upstream developers from outside Debian.

Make an early release, publicise that release on Freshmeat, get it uploaded to Debian and research existing packages that may already be using similar code and ask for their assistance.


Neil Williams

Attachment: pgpNomEG0N3Fr.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: