* Francesco P. Lovergine ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030910 15:05]: > On Wed, Sep 10, 2003 at 12:43:21PM +0200, Andreas Barth wrote: > > I also offered > > to take over maintainership, or co-maintainership if the current > > maintainer prefer this.
> What was the answer? That he plans to abandon mgetty in a few months, but I must pass the NM-queue before being able to become a (co-)maintainer. (And my saying that I can become maintainer as long as I find a sponsor didn't bring me a new answer.) > > My question now is: How should I proceed? Should I do a NMU? (If yes: > > Who is willing to sponsor it?) Should I try to hijack? > Did you consider uploading of a new source mgetty-ng which > replaces/provides/conflicts with mgetty ? So the choice could be > left to the users. Yes, I considered that. However, I do not like that. If a package is broken, it should IMHO be fixed and not duplicated. But if this is the least-wrong way, I would go it. Cheers, Andi -- http://home.arcor.de/andreas-barth/ PGP 1024/89FB5CE5 DC F1 85 6D A6 45 9C 0F 3B BE F1 D0 C5 D1 D9 0C
