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

Maintainance of your packages



Hi Sam,

You've said in [1] that you are currently too busy to take care of your
packages. There is nothing wrong with that, but if you are unable to
attend to your packages for many months, and cannot reply to bugs,
whichever high impact they have on your package (except when it's asked
to take over your package or for it to be removed it seems), it's highly
advisable to have backup maintainers for your packages, so that at least
someone is looking at it.

Since you didn't say until when you're busy, and several of your
packages have major problems for more than half a year, and still have
them, I'm going to walk by them, and say what I intend to do with them
for now.

By the way, *please* go through your mail and do something with the
important mails you've gotten regarding your packages, like security
issues, completely broken packages reports, etc. You're listed as
maintainer, which means that one may expect important issues to be dealt
with/forwarded to someone with more time within reasonable timeframe,
being marked as on vacation isn't an excuse for not responding at all
for half a year.

* bpalogin -- login client for the Telstra Bigpond Cable Network
  (Australia)

  #231583 was misdirected, needed to go to d-i. It's probably too late
  by now for that... Reassigned

* libtext-wikiformat-perl

  Despite having a new upstream available since May, nothing interesting

* mysource

  You've filed a grave bug because the package is in development -- this
  does not mean that the upstream package is still in beta or such,
  rather, it looks quite mature to me, and it's just the packaging
  that's not quite ready. You didn't upload it in 16 months, and you are
  3 stable branches behind (2.4.x vs 2.10.x with kernel-type version
  scheme)

  I'll file a RFH on this package, you obviously don't have enough time
  for this package

* pound -- reverse proxy, load balancer and https front-end for web-servers 

  With your last upload you apparantly broke SSL, advertised in the
  short description, and obviously a core feature of the package. I
  don't think it's of release quality due to this bug, I'm upgrading the
  bug to RC, and will file a RFH on this one too.

* pxesconfig

  The corresponding package pxes which it is supposed to configure
  isn't yet in the archive, see ITP #222363 and #222366

  This package has never been installable, so doesn't need real
  attention. I'm going to ping these ITP's, and when no reaction comes,
  I'm going to rename them to RFP again, and file a QA-bug for removal
  of pxesconfig

* rdesktop

  Still two important bugs open claiming it fails to work completely,
  but you did make a new upload afterwards. You didn't say whether you
  tested it, but I'm not very confident you did, so the bug could still
  be present. As there is no real need for a completely broken package
  in sarge, I'll try to get someone to test it, and maybe file a RFH
  too, especially since it's quite high on the popcon stats.

* reseed

  no bugs, never has been more than one upstream release

* rtfm

  Just one upstream version behind, nothing important

* squirrelmail

  Lots of unattended security issues in woody (fixed by myself), and
  testing/unstable version was in pretty bad shape. I'll put myself as
  maintainer and you as co-maintainer, so that mails to the maintainer
  get attended (I'll forward any). It is basicly unmaintained since
  february, and more than 3 months ago I NMU'd, without any other
  reaction than the note that you were marked as on vacation (for 'final
  exams').

contrib packages:

* autorespond

  No important issues reported

* qmailadmin

  Seems to fail to work completely, six different people reported that,
  no single maintainer reaction, in addition, it FTBFS's.

  You promised to "It is however a useful package so I will have it
  fixed for the next release", but I don't know if you mean Sarge, but
  then you're quite late. I'll immediately file a RFH bug on this
  package, and upgrade bugs about it not working at all to RC.

* qmailmrtg7

  No issues reported

* vqadmin/vqregister

  FTBFS, was never part of a stable release and won't be this time
  either, leaving it for now


With these actions I hope to improve the overal quality of Debian
packages (this is _not_ a personal attack). After two months, I'll
re-evaluate, and ask for (possibly temporary) adoption of all of your
packages.

Thanks,
--Jeroen

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-release/2004/08/msg00316.html

-- 
Jeroen van Wolffelaar
Jeroen@wolffelaar.nl (also for Jabber & MSN; ICQ: 33944357)
http://Jeroen.A-Eskwadraat.nl



Reply to: