On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 05:42:39PM +0200, Jonas Smedegaard wrote: > Since you asked: I respectfully find ITN a very bad idea.
+1
> ITS is a process where you intend to take over responsibility.
>
> ITN is a process where you intend to put pressure on the existing
> maintainer for changing their way of doing *their* maintenance.
>
> If I am mistaken and ITN is only mild one-off contributions same a NMUs
> then I fail to see a reason for simply doing a 21-day-delayed NMU.
an 21-delayed NMU would also be inappropriate because we don't change the
vcs in an NMU, however delayed.
a QA upload (and moving the package to QA team maintenance, aka orphaning
it) would be the the currently agreed on practice.
--
cheers,
Holger
⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀
⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org
⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C
⠈⠳⣄
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. (Aldous Huxley)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
