Adrian Bunk <b...@debian.org> writes: > Regressing on being able to orphan all packages of a known-MIA/retired > maintainer would be very bad.
I agree, but that's not directly relevant here, since we're talking about team-maintained packages. The whole *point* of team maintenance is that there's no reason to orphan a package just because one team member went away. If that weren't the case, the package is, *by definition*, not team-maintained (or the team itself is MIA, which is a different issue as discussed below). >> Currently, when the MIA team finds someone who is no longer active, >> teams have to go do a bunch of work to strip their name out of uploader >> fields. That work doesn't really make Debian any better; it's just >> bookkeeping. When the team has other ways of knowing the health of >> their packages, I'd like to let them not do this bookkeeping. > You are assuming that the team notices without the current notifications > from the MIA team that a team member is no longer active in Debian. I'm really not. I'm pointing out that for a lot of teams, that literally *does not matter at all*. Absolutely nothing changes about the maintenance status of many team-maintained packages if the person who last worked on that package disappears. Teams often don't notice that someone is MIA because *it doesn't matter* for their workflow; they're happy to have people come and go. > You are assuming that the team has a non-zero number of active members > left after a member becomes MIA. No, I'm not -- as I pointed out in a separate message, this is a problem worth solving, but this is an MIA team problem that I think is best tackled from that angle. If all of a team's packages are bitrotting, then the team's packages should be orphaned just like we do with an MIA single maintainer. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
