Re: Debian QA Policy Draft
On Sun, Mar 28, 1999 at 11:13:43PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote:
> > > Re-upload the known orphaned packages with the 'Maintainer' field
> > > set to: "Orphaned Package <firstname.lastname@example.org>"
> > I've seen only 'Debian QA Group' (and variations) in Maintainer: fields
> > so far - isn't that more suitable? Users will be scared to use packages
> > like that, and we'll have less chances to get some new maintainer for
> > them.
> Seconded. If a package is maintained by the QA group it is not
> It's even possible that it would be in a far better
> state than some maintained package.
We should aim for exact opposite of this, though :)
> > BTW what can we do with maintainers who can't be reached by e-mails,
> > and their packages need attention? How can we know that they will/won't
> Please take a look at debian-policy where I've posted the 2nd half of
> Vincent's proposal. The QA team need to be able to do NMU's if the
> maintainer doesn't reacot or isn't reachable or some such.
I agree, but don't have time nor bandwidth to read *another* debian- list.
Please, tell me an URL or quote (can a non-subscriber of -policy vote
> > I wouldn't like 'publishing' these maintainers/packages on debian-devel,
> > not even in debian-private. Creating a 'black list' of 'non-caring'
> > maintainers is not acceptable.
> It would be a proper action to write to -devel that package x, y and z
> need a new maintainer and people who are interested should speak up.
Yes, but by someone in position and who has every right to do so.
I wouldn't like to start pointing out bad maintainers on -devel.
> non-caring maintainers and maintainers who aren't reachable are different
> groups. Well, I could name at least one for each who isn't in the
> other group.
Yes, but both are problematic and tend to make things worse.
> > There is a solution, maybe, in creating minilist (say, email@example.com) for
> > the members of Technical Comittee, where a developer can discretely approach
> > when in doubt about delicate matters? I understand that noone likes bosses
> > (neither do I), but really, we have to have a body that can take control
> > when things get out of hands.
> The tech committee has a private group debian-ctte-private.
When I became a maintainer I heard only of one private list (which I was
subscribed on), debian-private. Why isn't that address written somewhere?
enJoy -*/\*- http://jagor.srce.hr/~jrodin/