On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 05:54:51AM +0800, Ray Rashif wrote: > On 24 September 2010 05:07, Heiko Baums <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Now, to clarify: Bumping a package everytime there is a version is the > >> *definition* of maintaining a package. > > > > Of course this is the definition of maintaining a package. But this > > doesn't have to be done within 2 or 3 hours after upstream has released > > a new version. And an orphan request shouldn't be sent 2 or 3 hours > > after upstream has released the new version. > > That is _not_ the "definition" of "maintaining a package", it is > "part" of the maintenance. Everyone has a life, and everyone has a > choice. This is the bazaar. > > It is correct that rapid action is applauded, but it is not a > requirement for ownership of a package. If anyone is unhappy with the > frequency or time it takes for the owner to update her package(s), the > concerned can either update the copy of the buildscripts locally and > inform everyone else how to do it, or, request to orphan the package > so she can help maintain instead and provide the rapid action which > was previously lacking. Of course, that does not mean we would gladly > comply with such a request. >
I don't think what I'm saying here is being clearly understood. :-( Updating a package each time there is a release *is* maintaining the package, only without the title of a "package maintainer". The point I am trying to bring across is that if you are going to be doing everything that a package maintainer does, then adopt the package so people can contact you correctly and such! I'm sorry if it is a misunderstanding on my part, but I fail to see really any other aspect of being a package maintainer besides maintaining the package! (Except maybe the responsibility of maintaining it, but if you plan on updating it anyway, like Det wanted to, then that shouldn't matter) Also, I doubt clicking the "Adopt" button would affect your life in any way if you are already doing the dirty work of maintaining it! Thanks, Brad
