On Wed, 12 Aug 2015 at 15:37 Rob McCathie <[email protected]> wrote: > On 12/08/15 13:49, Doug Newgard wrote: > > In my case, I have some that I'm actively trying to get maintainers > > for; in the mean time, I'm looking after them even though they are > > listed as being orphaned. Is this not to be allowed now? Should all > > "orphan" packages in the official repos be deleted, just assume nobody > > is looking after them? I updated one package just a few days before it > > was randomly deleted. There's other stories further up in this thread > > about them being deleted after only a few hours, all with no notice. > > If a time limit is to be implemented, it needs to be limit long enough > > that the package is both unlikely to be being used and unlikely to > > work anymore. A month or two wouldn't cut it. A notice should also be > > sent out to anyone set to get notifications for that package with > > enough lead time for someone to pick it up. Doug > > Same here. I was still monitoring the couple of packages i'd orphaned, i > was hoping someone would take over maintenance. For a time at least, i'd > have addressed any issues with them. > > Anyways, i've re-added the packages and will stay maintainer of them > until things settle down a bit. > > -- > Regards, > > Rob McCathie >
I've had to do the same thing. The problem is, if it isn't orphaned, and you try to update it when you get a chance it is hard to find a new maintainer. I've never seen someone ask for maintainership of a maintained and up-to-date package before. From the reports I'm seeing as well it's a single TU deleting them all. - Justin
