Paul Wise wrote:
> On Jan 10, 2008 3:37 AM, Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Hmm, debian-qa is not a maintainer, it's not like the QA Team maintains
>> packages, it is only a go-between maintainers IMHO. I don't really get
>> the part about group maintenance in this discussion...
>
> His
On Jan 10, 2008 3:37 AM, Luk Claes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hmm, debian-qa is not a maintainer, it's not like the QA Team maintains
> packages, it is only a go-between maintainers IMHO. I don't really get
> the part about group maintenance in this discussion...
Historically the QA team has do
tim hall wrote:
> Lars Wirzenius wrote:
>> On ke, 2008-01-09 at 11:10 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
>>> This is my context, but my question is generic. How are packages
>>> maintained by developers that resign handled, and how should they be
>>> handled.
>>
>> Why should they be handled differ
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> More than a year ago, Matthew Garrett resigned from Debian. His
> decision is explained in
> http://mjg59.livejournal.com/66647.html>. He still is listed as
> the maintainer of several packages on
> http://qa.debian.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> and seem to kind of mainta
On Wed, 9 Jan 2008, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
Given Matthew's reasons for resigning, I think it would be
respectful to spare him the emails
Well, if there is no better communication channel than e-mail
I would go for it starting: I would like to consider your wish
to not to get any Debian rel
On ke, 2008-01-09 at 12:09 +, tim hall wrote:
> Lars Wirzenius wrote:
> > On ke, 2008-01-09 at 11:10 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> >> This is my context, but my question is generic. How are packages
> >> maintained by developers that resign handled, and how should they be
> >> handled.
>
Lars Wirzenius wrote:
On ke, 2008-01-09 at 11:10 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
This is my context, but my question is generic. How are packages
maintained by developers that resign handled, and how should they be
handled.
Why should they be handled differently from any other packages whos
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 11:10:01AM +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> This is my context, but my question is generic. How are packages
> maintained by developers that resign handled, and how should they be
> handled. Personally, I believe those packages should be orphaned
> right away, to make i
[Tim Hall]
> Surely that is the correct action?
Well, I can't read it out of the Debian policy nor the developer
reference, so I have followed the documented procedure of trying to
get the previous maintainer to accept the takeover. But I agree that
it would be the correct action, and believe it
On ke, 2008-01-09 at 11:10 +0100, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
> This is my context, but my question is generic. How are packages
> maintained by developers that resign handled, and how should they be
> handled.
Why should they be handled differently from any other packages whose
maintainers are su
Petter Reinholdtsen wrote:
How are packages
maintained by developers that resign handled, and how should they be
handled. Personally, I believe those packages should be orphaned
right away, to make it easier for others to take over.
Surely that is the correct action?
As it is now,
one nee
More than a year ago, Matthew Garrett resigned from Debian. His
decision is explained in
http://mjg59.livejournal.com/66647.html>. He still is listed as
the maintainer of several packages on
http://qa.debian.org/[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
and seem to kind of maintain at least libpam-foreground (got one
12 matches
Mail list logo
