On Tue, May 25, 2010 at 07:01:14PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > I do not have a strong opinion on the subject (since I never browse the RFP > > bugs), but I suggest to take the following threads and messages into account > > before making a final decision: > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2005/06/msg00299.html > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2005/09/msg00587.html > > http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2005/09/msg00014.html > I personally think that RFPs have some value, as they document that at > least someone is interested in a package for $software. The problem I'm > trying to solve here is about ITPs and ITAs, not RFP. Feel free to start > a discussion about how to deal with old RFPs yourself. I think RFPs are all but useless, and that an ITP does not automatically translate into an RFP anyway - a stale ITP may mean that the proposer is no longer interested in the package at all, not that they want someone else to package it because they've run out of time. So I would propose closing stale ITPs outright, not converting them to RFPs. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slangasek@ubuntu.com vorlon@debian.org
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature