On 2026-04-17 10:30:07 +0200, Matthias Klose wrote: > On 4/16/26 16:16, Sebastian Ramacher wrote: > > On 2026-04-11 18:30:44 +0200, László Böszörményi (GCS) wrote: > > > Hi Sebastian, Matthias, > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 2, 2026 at 7:09 PM Sebastian Ramacher <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > Control: tags -1 confirmed > > > [...] > > > > Qt 6.10 is done, please go ahead. > > > I'm wondering how to go forward. Matthias and I exchanged emails on > > > how to go with abseil maintenance, I may join as a co-maintainer as > > > I'm involved with it. Then nothing was agreed upon. > > > But I'm wondering if he has time to move on with this transition. It > > > was nine days ago when you gave it a go. If Matthis doesn't respond in > > > another five days (two weeks in total), would I be allowed to start > > > the transition, adding myself as a co-maintainer? > > > Matthias, if you are reading this before the five days, please step up > > > and start this transition. > > > > From my point of view, you can do the upload to unstable following the > > usual NMU rules (unless there was an agreement on co-maintenance in the > > meantime). > > please don't. > > If it takes the release team more than a month for even a reaction on a > transition, two more weeks for an approval, it shouldn't be a problem for > letting this alone for two weeks. > > And comparing that to icu's transitions or other transitions owned by > Laszlo, which were either not done or delayed by multiple months or even > years, two weeks delay should be fine.
This has nothing to do with the release team. From our point of view we do not care who starts the transition. It is ACKed. This is an issue between you and Laszlo. Cheers -- Sebastian Ramacher
