Hi Tobias,
Am Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 03:39:06PM +0100 schrieb Tobias Frost:
> Well, there are established procedures in Debian that should be
> followed, for example Developers Reference §7.4.
>
> Currently we have these¹ ways to change maintainership in Debian:
> - The maintainer files an "O:" (or to some extend "RFA","RFH") bug.
> - Change through ITS
> - The MIA team completes the MIA process with the result that the
> maintainer is no longer active. (I've not seen a mail from you on this
> matter on the mia team alias)
I admit I might have been a bit lazy about this. Shame on me. I
vaguely remember you once said that the MIA team was also a bit inactive
overworked so - maybe / hopefully I'm wrong here. I will send you
some more maintainers which I consider MIA.
BTW, except for voting I see no activity from Shane[1]
> - The techincal commitee.
>
> (¹ leaving out other ways that are applicable for e.g team maintained
> co-maintained, etc packages)
IMHO the dotconf example shows that these established procedures do not
seem to be sufficient.
> BTW, PLEASE do not retitle all the bugs in dotconf to "Intend to orphan
> package", this feels for me like an misuse of the BTS.
Argh, please assume that this was not intentional at all! I assumed the
bug in To:-field would be set and not the ones in CC. I should have
mentioned it explicitly - my fault. I've reset the titles of the other
bugs. You might kindly assume that I'm not *that* loud in my ways to
communicate but mistakes happen unfortunately.
Kind regards
Andreas.
[1] https://contributors.debian.org/contributor/shane/
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2025 at 01:47:44PM +0100, Andreas Tille wrote:
> > Control: retitle -1 Intend to orphan package
> > Thanks
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I've kept a couple of people in CC who spotted some misuse of the ITS
> > process in the case of vtgrab. To avoid this in the case of dotconf I
> > intend to orphan dotconf which was now moved to the Debian/ team[4].
> > I'm aware that orphaning can be only done by the maintainer - but what
> > if
> >
> > 1. the maintainer has done the last upload more than 15 years ago
>
> Follow the procedure in layed out in the Developers Reference §7.4, for
> example by contacting the MIA Team.
>
> > 2. does not respond to some email after 21 (when this ITS bug was opened)
>
> If you do not intend to adopt the package, you should not have started the ITS
> process.
>
> > 3. the package "survived" thanks to 3 NMUs and is de facto
> > QA maintained
>
> > Since this package is quite frequently used according popcon we can
> > not simply delete it. Thus I will wait another week for a response.
> > If there is no answer from the maintainer I'll upload the content
> > of the Salsa repository[4] to delayed=10.
>
> "Orphaning" a package will not magically make it maintained, so I'm not
> sure what benefits you expect from this.
> On the other side orphaning by creating facts (and not following
> procedures) has a high risk of alienating people, your proposal is
> outside of current procedures.
>
> --
> tobi
>
> > Kind regards
> > Andreas.
> >
> > [4] https://salsa.debian.org/debian/dotconf
> > [5]
> > https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#orphaning
> >
> > Am Fri, Jan 31, 2025 at 10:02:17AM +0100 schrieb Andreas Tille:
> > > Source: dotconf
> > > Version: 1.3-0.3
> > > Severity: important
> > > Tags: patch
> > > X-Debbugs-Cc: [email protected], [email protected], Package
> > > Salvaging Team <[email protected]>, Shane Wegner
> > > <[email protected]>, Samuel Thibault <[email protected]>
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I'm interested in salvaging your package dotconf, in accordance with the
> > > Package Salvaging procedure outlined in the Developers Reference[1].
> > > Your package meets the criteria for this process, and I would love to
> > > assist in preserving and maintaining it. As the Salvage process
> > > suggests, here is a list of the criteria that apply, in my opinion:
> > >
> > > - NMUs (more than one NMU in a row).
> > > - Bugs filed against the package do not have answers from the
> > > maintainer.
> > > - Upstream has released several versions, but despite there being
> > > a bug entry asking for it, it has not been packaged.
> > > - There are QA issues with the package.
> > >
> > > I've set up a repository within the salvage-team space[2] to assist you
> > > with this initial setup. If you decide not to accept the ITS, this
> > > repository can easily be moved to another location, such as debian/, or
> > > any place of your choosing. I hope this service helps make the
> > > transition to using a Git repository on Salsa smoother and more
> > > convenient for you.
> > >
> > > Your package was highlighted in the Bug of the Day[3] initiative, which
> > > aims to introduce newcomers to manageable tasks and guide them through
> > > the workflow to solve them. The focus of this initiative is on migrating
> > > packages to Salsa, as it's a great way to familiarize newcomers with a
> > > consistent Git-based workflow.
> > >
> > > Kind regards
> > > Andreas.
> > >
> > > [1]
> > > https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.en.html#package-salvaging
> > > [2] https://salsa.debian.org/salvage-team/dotconf
> > > [3] https://salsa.debian.org/tille/tiny_qa_tools/-/wikis/Tiny-QA-tasks
> > >
> > > -- System Information:
> > > Debian Release: trixie/sid
> > > APT prefers unstable
> > > APT policy: (500, 'unstable'), (500, 'testing'), (50,
> > > 'buildd-unstable'), (1, 'experimental')
> > > Architecture: amd64 (x86_64)
> > >
> > > Kernel: Linux 6.3.0-2-amd64 (SMP w/8 CPU threads; PREEMPT)
> > > Kernel taint flags: TAINT_WARN
> > > Locale: LANG=de_DE.UTF-8, LC_CTYPE=de_DE.UTF-8 (charmap=UTF-8), LANGUAGE
> > > not set
> > > Shell: /bin/sh linked to /usr/bin/dash
> > > Init: systemd (via /run/systemd/system)
> > > LSM: AppArmor: enabled
> > >
> >
> > --
> > https://fam-tille.de
>
--
https://fam-tille.de
