Re: Hijacking^W^W^W^W^W^WSalvaging packages for fun and profit: A proposal

Hi Charles, On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 06:44:53PM +0900, Charles Plessy wrote: here are some comments. - It would be more straight to the point to submit an Intend To Salvage (ITS) and focus on such takeovers, because merly orphaning the package does not guarantee that it will be

Re: Hijacking^W^W^W^W^W^WSalvaging packages for fun and profit: A proposal

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 11:27:03AM +0200, Arno Töll wrote: Hi, On 11.10.2012 07:50, Bart Martens wrote: - the submitter of the intent to orphan bug must Cc debian-qa@lists.debian.org, and file the bug with severity:serious (this was part of the criterias proposal). | Anyone

Re: Hijacking^W^W^W^W^W^WSalvaging packages for fun and profit: A proposal

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 08:20:36AM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: On 11/10/12 at 05:50 +, Bart Martens wrote: And the maintainer does not respond within one month after the the third second. I'm not sure about this delay. This procedure should be used for uncontroversial cases, where

Re: Hijacking^W^W^W^W^W^WSalvaging packages for fun and profit: A proposal

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 10:21:59AM +0200, Gergely Nagy wrote: Lucas Nussbaum lu...@lucas-nussbaum.net writes: I'm not sure about this delay. This procedure should be used for uncontroversial cases, where orphaning is obviously the right choice. I strongly agree here. A package that's a