Re: RFS: NMU goocanvas (updated package)
On 08/05/10 at 20:20 +0900, Charles Plessy wrote:
> Le Sat, May 08, 2010 at 01:01:00PM +0200, Jeffrey Ratcliffe a écrit :
> > On Sat, May 08, 2010 at 09:57:53AM +0800, Paul Wise wrote:
> > > You might want ping the maintainer directly and to report them as MIA
> > > if they do not respond:
> >
> > He's been pinged on several occasions on #521722[1]. Ubuntu has
> > had new upstream version for nearly a year.
> >
> > I'll ping him again directly and wait two weeks, but I assumed this is
> > what the 10-day delayed queue was for - to give the maintainer a last
> > chance to respond before the NMU is uploaded.
>
> Dear Jeff,
>
> If goocanvas is updated by NMU, who will be responsible for taking care for any
> issue introduced by this upload: the maintainer? you? the NMU sponsor? It is to
> avoid such solution where responsability is unclear that packages are not
> updated by NMU in Debian.
It is not unclear. If Jeff NMUes it, he is responsible (together with
his sponsor) for the damage he will have introduced.
> If the maintainer does not respond to the requests
> for updates, is is a hint that the package needs a new maintainer (in addition
> or replacement for the current one), or that the package should better be
> removed. Updating a package by NMU solves a problem in the short term, but
> increases the risk that nobody will be there for later problems.
>
> Perhaps you can propose to the current maintainer to open his package to
> collaborative maintainance, by creating or joining a team, or simply accepting
> co-maintainers (you?) who commit themselves on a longer term than a single
> upload?
So you recommend to continue to try to contact the maintainer? When does
it stop?
It sounds perfectly fine to update the package with a NMU, with the due
notices to the maintainer (DELAYED/7 or more). Independantly, Jeff
should also make sure that the MIA team knows about that maintainer, so,
in the end, the MIA team will be able to orphan the package.
In general, I think that we are a bit too careful when dealing with
non-responding maintainers. The maintainer of this package has ignored
comments on that bug report for more than a year, despite making an
upload on another package recently
(http://packages.qa.debian.org/d/deja-dup/news/20100403T142238Z.html).
It is quite clear that he lost interest, but forgot to orphan the
package.
Also, the behaviour of not replying to to such requests is really very
harmful, and causes a huge loss of time to the project: replying with a
"sorry, I'm too busy, please take appropriate action to take over the
package" message takes less than 5 mins. Instead, we are discussing this
on -mentors@, have to get the MIA team involved, and delay updates. That
sucks.
Lucas
Reply to: