On Jun 07, Christian Kurz wrote: > (Responding to my proposal:) > > ``However, if QA Group members make 3 consecutive bugfix uploads, with > > no action on the part of the maintainer, the package will be marked as > > orphaned 60 days after the first QA Group bugfix upload, and the > > 'Maintainer' field of the package will be set to "Debian QA Group > > <debian-qa@lists.debian.org>".'' > > Thanks, this is a very good and IMHO better than the old one. So I would > recommend using this one instead of the old one. This also makes sure > that we don't have to many packages where the maintainer is MIA but also > we don't thread the developers to much to work on their packages.
Looking over that paragraph again, I guess it's implied that if bugfix upload #3 is more than 60 days after bugfix upload #1, and there has been no intervening action on the part of the maintainer, it can be orphaned in bugfix upload #3. So the 60 days is a minimum time period. I guess that makes it more like: ``However, if QA Group members make 3 consecutive bugfix uploads, and the maintainer does not respond with a maintainer release incorporating the fixes within 60 days of the first QA Group upload, the package will be marked as orphaned and the 'Maintainer' field of the package will be set to "Debian QA Group <debian-qa@lists.debian.org>".'' I think it reads a bit more clearly in the active voice. Chris, who (in his defense) did watch too much L.A. Law. -- ============================================================================= | Chris Lawrence | The Linux/m68k FAQ | | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://www.linux-m68k.org/faq/faq.html | | | | | Grad Student, Pol. Sci. | Visit the Amiga Web Directory | | University of Mississippi | http://www.cucug.org/amiga.html | =============================================================================
