Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilb...@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, Oct 25, 2012 at 7:52 PM, Russ Allbery wrote:
>> I certainly have no objection to people doing this, but I'm not sure >> that's really what we're discussing here. I think the thread is more >> about the ongoing issue that we seem to have in Debian where the >> existing procedure for orphaning packages is perceived as too >> heavy-weight and we believe that there are packages that aren't being >> cared for, aren't orphaned, and that someone else would work on if the >> status were clearer. > It is a proposed solution to the above issue, so it is intimately > apropos to the discussion at hand in my opinion. Okay, well, I guess I return to my previous statement, then. I don't think your proposed solution will work for the more common cases. It's certainly fine for people to try it, though, and I don't think it requires any changes to any procedures for people to do so. -- Russ Allbery (r...@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87d306ului....@windlord.stanford.edu
