Hi Santiago, On 16-05-2019 20:24, Santiago Vila wrote: > On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 07:43:09PM +0200, Paul Gevers wrote: > >> The reason why it got removed, is that nobody was looking after razor. >> Otherwise, preventing removal would have been easy. > > Indeed. If I had known that it was going to be removed, I would have > downgraded the severity of the bug before the autoremoval happened. After the fact, I had the same idea. > We have a lot of packages maintained by "Debian QA" and we don't > remove them from Debian just because they don't have a proper > maintainer. We just keep them because they are useful. > > So, if it helps, I would be willing to make an upload to officially > orphan it (using "Debian QA" as the Maintainer field) to be on par > with every other QA-maintained package. Personally, I don't think it > would change things a lot but if it's the difference between keeping > razor in or out of buster, I will be happy to make an upload for that. Well, if they are maintained by the QA group, there are at least around 90 people notified of stuff. > (And if that's not enough, I would even be willing to put my name in > the maintainer field, only until we find another maintainer, but in > such case I would feel that we are being more strict with this package > than any other QA-maintained package). Let me sleep another night on this unblock request (and give other RT members a chance to chime in). But even if we go this way I don't see it that we are more strict. razor got unlucky timing, but we're in a freeze and you're asking for an exception. Every exception has it's own argumentation and reasons. Paul
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature