Re: DDs: etiquette of inquring about status of an ITP?
Chris Metzler <cmetzler@speakeasy.net> writes:
> Anyone's opinion is valued, of course; but I'm especially interested in
> hearing from any DDs who might read this . . .
>
> I'm curious what the etiquette is about inquiring into the status of
> an ITP. On one hand, I'm reluctant to ask because I don't want to seem
> like I'm prodding the developer who posted the ITP, especially when
> he/she has volunteered time to do this. I don't want to be rude or
> seem ungrateful. But OTOH, if I knew for a fact that it wouldn't be
> coming soon, then I'd be more likely to go ahead and pull time from
> all the other stuff I'm supposed to be doing and try to learn how to
> put it together myself (I'm not a developer by any stretch; but I can
> run Make and google on compile errors and so on).
>
> Would it seem annoying to you to get such an inquiry after a couple
> of months? Six months after posting the ITP? A year? If there's
> some point when it isn't rude, is it more appropriate to do it by
> mailing to the WNPP bug, or by a private email to the DD?
I don't think you should need to wait at all. Simple inquiries aren't
really annoying, and can even be helpful if that maintainer is in need
of interested people to test packages.
If you don't get a response in about 2 weeks, I'd go ahead and hijack
the ITP. Sure, doing so may occasionally piss someone off, but there
are *far* too many dead ITPs already. Besides, there should never be a
need to announce an ITP if it's taking more than 2 weeks to package
something anyway.
--
Don't worry, it's *in*-flammable.
Reply to: