Re: Report from Debconf's QA BOF
On 15/08/08 at 12:30 -0400, Joey Hess wrote:
> Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
> > Sure, Luk was here, and didn't express any disagreement. Actually, I
> > tried hard to give several opportunities to raise concerns, but
> > everybody apparently really agreed with the proposal. (you might want to
> > check the video when it will be available)
>
> That wasn't really my impression watching the video. I seem to recall
> Bdale arguing persuasively that this would be a bad idea, for one.
I think that Bdale's point was about removals from unstable (the bapase
stuff), for which, indeed, I agree that we need to be extremely careful,
and that we must always try to contact the maintainer.
I don't think that he opposed what was discussed about the handling of
orphaned packages. If I remember correctly, the discussion about
orphaned packages went quite well, then we switched to removals from
unstable, Ganneff talked, and then Bdale. Please correct me if I'm
wrong.
FWIW, my motivation for that is not to reduce archive size by removing
tons of packages, but to increase the visibility of orphaned packages,
so those which are useful to someone find an adopter. Each time I run
wnpp-alert, I'm amazed by what I read, and I can't adopt everything I
use, unfortunately.
> (IMHO: Horrible idea, will tend to result in maintainers not orphaning
> packages and instead letting them rot unmaintained.)
Isn't it already the case? Do you have something better to propose? Or
do you think that we can continue to ignore that >5% of our archive
doesn't have a maintainer?
--
| Lucas Nussbaum
| lucas@lucas-nussbaum.net http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ |
| jabber: lucas@nussbaum.fr GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F |
Reply to: