Arnaud Vandyck wrote: > As you mentionned, a lot of packages does not need a lot of attention. > Why do you want to orphan a package that could be just here because a > lot of people use it and it does not need upload!
*Because at a certain point it will need attention, perhaps urgently, and then nobody will feel the need to attend to it. *Also because it would make the danger of bit-rot visible. *Finally I would expect that another co-maintainer would take over the package if the main maintainer drops out, so it would not need to be orphaned. >> > I'm listed as uploader in serveral packages and have been mostly >> > inactive for about two years. I should have removed myself from all >> > these packages. So if someone wants to remove me in the next uploads, >> > that's fine. >> >> Well, I'm glad you told us about it! Ideally people who retire would >> remove their name from the packages in SVN, so the change would be in the >> next release. > > Stefan hasn't retire. I take his statement to mean that he has stopped maintaining those packages, and no longer wishes to be a co-maintainer. > but just does not have the time at the moment. Two years is not just "at the moment". Everyone has the right to be away from Debian now and then, that's when co-maintainers are useful. But if that goes on for years, or if the person is MIA, it's more reasonable to hand over the packages. >> > The main problem IMHO is that most of the team members are only active >> > for a (shorter or longer) period of time and then get busy with other >> > things. Some return after a cople of months, others don't. Some (like >> > me) still have the hope to return in the future. >> >> I think your analysis is correct. That's why it is important to have >> clear responsibility, otherwise we can more or less expect packages to >> get silently orphaned. > > The responsability is to the group. Yes, and I argue that this isn't working very well. >> Note that I still propose that we would have a group of maintainers, with >> the others listed as Uploaders. Anyone could join and list themselves as >> Uploaders, much like today. > > But it's working in a different way. It does not invite people to > participate. Well, I don't understand this argument, which Stefan also put forward. If the team web site states clearly that every member can become Uploader, then why not? >> It will fix one aspect of the problem, namely that >> "shared responsibility" equals "no responsibility" >> in too many cases. > > I don't agree with that. Everyone in the group is de facto responsible > for every package. Sorry, I don't think of it that way. I do not feel responsible in any way for packages where I'm not Uploader. I won't take blame for problems in, say, the kaffe packages that I never touched. We have hundreds of packages and nobody can be $responsible for all of them, for any reasonable value of $responsible. Perhaps this is a misunderstanding on my part? > I prefer the way we do it at the moment. Everyone can subscribe to > pkg-java and propose patches. Every member of the group can apply the > patches if they are good. Yes, that's good and my suggestion doesn't intend to change this. All I want to do is to attach one actual _person_ to each package, who can always be counted on to be responsible. Well, nobody seems to agree with me. :) But I think there is a real problem, which affects the quality of Debian as a Java platform. Marcus -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
