On Sun, Mar 28, 1999 at 11:13:43PM +0200, Martin Schulze wrote: > > > Re-upload the known orphaned packages with the 'Maintainer' field > > > set to: "Orphaned Package <debian-qa@lists.debian.org>" > > > > I've seen only 'Debian QA Group' (and variations) in Maintainer: fields > > so far - isn't that more suitable? Users will be scared to use packages > > like that, and we'll have less chances to get some new maintainer for > > them. > > Seconded. If a package is maintained by the QA group it is not > unmaintained.
Indeed. > It's even possible that it would be in a far better > state than some maintained package. We should aim for exact opposite of this, though :) > > BTW what can we do with maintainers who can't be reached by e-mails, > > and their packages need attention? How can we know that they will/won't > > Please take a look at debian-policy where I've posted the 2nd half of > Vincent's proposal. The QA team need to be able to do NMU's if the > maintainer doesn't reacot or isn't reachable or some such. I agree, but don't have time nor bandwidth to read *another* debian- list. Please, tell me an URL or quote (can a non-subscriber of -policy vote on something?). > > I wouldn't like 'publishing' these maintainers/packages on debian-devel, > > not even in debian-private. Creating a 'black list' of 'non-caring' > > maintainers is not acceptable. > > It would be a proper action to write to -devel that package x, y and z > need a new maintainer and people who are interested should speak up. Yes, but by someone in position and who has every right to do so. I wouldn't like to start pointing out bad maintainers on -devel. > non-caring maintainers and maintainers who aren't reachable are different > groups. Well, I could name at least one for each who isn't in the > other group. Yes, but both are problematic and tend to make things worse. > > There is a solution, maybe, in creating minilist (say, [EMAIL PROTECTED]) > > for > > the members of Technical Comittee, where a developer can discretely approach > > when in doubt about delicate matters? I understand that noone likes bosses > > (neither do I), but really, we have to have a body that can take control > > when things get out of hands. > > The tech committee has a private group debian-ctte-private. When I became a maintainer I heard only of one private list (which I was subscribed on), debian-private. Why isn't that address written somewhere? -- enJoy -*/\*- http://jagor.srce.hr/~jrodin/
