Hi Tim, On Fri, 5 Aug 2011 11:20:28 +0100 Tim Retout <diocles@debian.org> wrote: > On 4 August 2011 13:23, Neil McGovern <neilm@debian.org> wrote: > > Indeed, that sounds accurate, but I don't personally want to accept this > > as a release goal without maintainer agreement. Could you perhaps > > consider opening a bug against the package, saying 'unfit for the > > archive' or something, and then re-assigning to tech-ctte? > > Would you feel differently if yada were orphaned? My understanding is > that this could happen quite soon - so far I have been unable to > elicit a response from the maintainer on bug #334164. I've already orphaned all his packages (was already on the MIA radar). I may be wrong but I think it would be somewhat easy to fix yada to be able to work with a existing control and rules files instead of regenerating them on each build. That would fix all those problems, but unfortunately I lack the time for yet another package, and upstream is missing, so... > If this does not happen within the next week, and in the absence of > any response from the maintainer, I'll consider the tech-ctte route. regards, -- Ricardo Mones http://people.debian.org/~mones «You enjoy the company of other people.»
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature