On Mon, 22 Nov 2010, Russ Allbery wrote: > Ian Jackson <[email protected]> writes: > > Joachim Wiedorn writes: > > >> Finally it would be nice we could move the new Debian packages into > >> Debian unstable ... > > > I agree that Joachim and Matt Arnold should be made the joint lilo > > maintainers. Would other TC members please express an opinion ? > > If people are actively maintaining lilo, then yes, I think those people > should be the package maintainers in preference to removing the package. > In general, I think a good principle to follow is that if there are people > who actively care about a package, we shouldn't remove that package unless > there's some sort of overriding issue.
Is there any objection to starting the voting process on this issue with the options presented in http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=587886#55 ? [for reference: A. lilo should be removed. In the meantime, William is to be sole maintainer of lilo. His promised request to the ftp team to remove lilo should be honoured, after which the ftp masters should not permit Matt and/or Joachim to reupload a new lilo package. B. lilo should be retained in unstable. Matt and Joachim are to be joint maintainers of lilo. ] Don Armstrong -- Quite the contrary; they *love* collateral damage. If they can make you miserable enough, maybe you'll stop using email entirely. Once enough people do that, then there'll be no legitimate reason left for anyone to run an SMTP server, and the spam problem will be solved. -- Craig Dickson in <[email protected]> http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
