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

Re: NMU for libkarma (Rio Karma tools)?

On Wednesday 14 October 2009 15:42:21 Harald Dunkel wrote:
> On 10/12/09 07:02, Charles Plessy wrote:
> > Fixing bugs is very welcome, especially RC ones. Actually, you can save
> > time to fix more RC bugs by not fixing the less important ones in the
> > packages that you try to rescue :) I still recommend to not include a new
> > upstream release in the NMU you are proposing. Especially because the
> > package is poorly maintained: the side effect of the NMU is to rescue the
> > package from removal, so if nobody feels responsible for it, it is safer
> > to not introduce changes that can introduce new bugs.
> Sorry to say, but this is counterproductive. AFAICS the new upstream
> version works better than the old one, and it includes almost all bug
> fixes done for Debian. If you suggest to ignore upstream's new version
> and add patches to the old version instead, just because the package
> maintainer is not interested anymore, then this leads to just another
> dead package.
> I want to do an NMU _because_ the package is poorly maintained. libkarma
> has to be rescued. There is no alternative to this package.

There is a established procedure for taking maintainership for a package from 
a non-responsive maintainer.  If you'd like to take maintainership, please 
start that process.  In the meantime a suitable NMU should be prepared until 
(if) you become the maintainer.

If you don't have time, I wonder if this is a good place for collab-maint to 
step in?
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.           	 ,= ,-_-. =.
bss@iguanasuicide.net            	((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy 	 `-'(. .)`-'
http://iguanasuicide.net/        	     \_/

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Reply to: