Hi, On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 07:34:17PM -0300, Antonio Terceiro wrote: > On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 10:27:03PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > > What is your offer? To take over? No, you don't want to do an ITS. > > > > You want to do "help" the maintainer see the light in changing their way > > of working themselves, by doing a one-off non-mild "NMU" which is not an > > NMU because it is not mild but invasive. > > I think your reaction to this is a bit harsh. I see this ITN proposal as > a way how to handle pacakges that are effectively unmaintained, but > where one is not necessarily interested in becoming the maintainer. > > Importing the package into git will make the life of almost everyone¹ > who comes across this package in the future easier. Yes, it's not > exactly a NMU in the strict sense, but who cares? The package is > *abandoned*. Maybe just not calling it an NMU would be a compromise? > > ¹ yes I know there are people who don't (yet?) use git for maintaining > packages, and that's OK. I even have friends who do it. > > If their packages are maintained, then nobody will touch it.
I tend to agree with Terceiro. Back to Andreas' initial message: "The affected packages have typically not seen activity from their maintainers in ≥5 years and do not appear to be maintained in any VCS accessible to Debian contributors (e.g. Salsa)." So whatever you call your intention here I guess we should see it with welcoming eyes. But, if one feels ITN can be somewhat misleading, let's just try something else: ITR (Intent to Revamp)? "to change or arrange something again, in order to improve it" note: I've seen 'ITR' being used in Debian before as Intend to Resign (does it make sense?) and also as Intent to Review (in some i18n context). I don't think it should be a problem, though. Or, again, whatever you call it. Let's just avoid an ITDN (Intend To Do Nothing) on such cases. Bests, -- Tiago
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
