Re: Mechanism for removing developers

[Hartmut Koptein <koptein@et-inf.fho-emden.de>]

This is now off-topic, but important (for me):

> What about me?  I'll use myself as example.  When I get bug reports, I look at
> them... fix them if I can, file them in the "to be done" if I can't.  The person
> who files that report won't hear from me, personally, unless I need for

Why will you not upload these packages then? 

> information.  So now, I have a bug that's in the "to be done" list on a minor
> package that I havn't touched for two months.  Kick me out?  I'm certainly
> active.
  ^^^^^^  This is the point. No active maintainer will be removed or kicked out or ... 

> If "One mail is enough -- the bug report!" then One response should be enough,
> also from the bug tracking system.  If you need the bug fixed, raise the
> severity (it'll be fixed by the next release, pulled or get a response from the

... raise the serverty ?  Should i do this really? If i should do this, slink will 
never be released bevor june! :-)


I don't understand why maintainer doesn't upload packages after an bug report, when
the bug is easy to fix or it was allready included in the bug-report. Why waiting
for the next upstream upload? 

I'll do make some NMU in the next time ( 2 - 3 weeks after the bug-report), if i don't hear 
anything from the maintainer. Some of the maintainer send me a mail "please don't do
an NMU, i will do it next weekend". This is then ok for me. I know then that the
maintainer is active and will work on his package. 

Some of these bug-report will make packages the first time available on some ports!!
Please think about this.



Regards,


    Hartmut