On Thu, Mar 14, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Matt S Trout wrote:
>
> If we decide that the policy side is appropriate, I'm happy enough being
> the mechanism (i.e. the one who goes and kicks the PAUSE interface); I'm
> sure I can find us a couple more volunteers who people wouldn't be too scared
> of having a
On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 10:19:01AM -0400, brian d foy wrote:
> In article
> ,
> David Golden wrote:
>
> > I think it "improves the universe" by letting the community flag
> > abandon-ware in a consistent, centralized way (because it winds up
> > mirrored in 06perms).
>
> I don't think that act
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 04:48:04PM -0400, brian d foy wrote:
> In article
> ,
> David Golden wrote:
>
> > That's why I think we make the parallel to our process and criteria
> > for 'taking over'. I.e. author not responsive. If the author is
> > responsive, then PAUSE admins take no action.
>
In article
,
David Golden wrote:
> I think it "improves the universe" by letting the community flag
> abandon-ware in a consistent, centralized way (because it winds up
> mirrored in 06perms).
I don't think that actually improves the situation. How is this
different than a person judging on hi
On Tue, Mar 12, 2013 at 4:48 PM, brian d foy wrote:
> If no one wants to take over the module and there's no one to give it
> up, does transferring the module improve the universe enough to offset
> the extra work we do? I don't think it does.
I think it "improves the universe" by letting the com
In article
,
David Golden wrote:
> That's why I think we make the parallel to our process and criteria
> for 'taking over'. I.e. author not responsive. If the author is
> responsive, then PAUSE admins take no action.
I don't see any benefit from the work. If you game it out
If someone wants
On Sun, Mar 10, 2013 at 1:10 AM, brian d foy wrote:
>> (1) Anyone can propose that any distribution (and it's contained
>> packages) have ADOPTME be added as co-maint on the grounds of it being
>> abandoned
>
> This is the only hard part of the process. I'd consider doing it the
> same way that we
In article
,
David Golden wrote:
> (1) Anyone can propose that any distribution (and it's contained
> packages) have ADOPTME be added as co-maint on the grounds of it being
> abandoned
This is the only hard part of the process. I'd consider doing it the
same way that we handle module takeovers.
