Le Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 05:00:57PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli a écrit : > > The point of NMUs is *helping* a maintainer which, for different reasons, is > temporarily unable to fix specific issues in their packages. If the NMU-er > keeps that principle in mind, everything else descends more or less > naturally.
Hi Stefano, much of you wrote here make a lot of sense, and I think it would be a good stem for an update the Developers Reference (and therefore mark DEP1 obsolete after four years of good service to Debian). But a point on which I am often commenting, for which I would be very interested to read your opinion, is when the NMU misses the point that the package is not maintained anymore. If we would converge on a good rule of thumb to replace the nth NMU in a row to a QA orphaning, then I believe that the updated NMU section in the Developers Reference would then stay unchanged for a long time. Have a nice Sunday, -- Charles Plessy Tsurumi, Kanagawa, Japan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120422024907.gf19...@falafel.plessy.net
