Hi, On 6/9/26 15:07, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
As a Debian contributor, I could discover a package poorly maintained inside Debian Commons and might be interested in "salvaging" it to maintain it myself, instead of maintaining it following the Debian Commons procedures. So yes, I think that it applies more broadly, because people outside Debian Commons will need to interface with Debian Commons.
When I announced Debian Commons, I didn't mean that to be a team any more than the QA team is the team that maintains orphaned packages. I don't think you "interface" with the QA team. The QA team doesn't exist as a team maintaining packages. I didn't intend Debian Commons to be one either. I wanted to express that a package that *I* intent to keep in a healthy state by occasional but maybe not so frequent uploads is open for uploads by anybody that cares about the package. Like documenting *in* the package that I'm on the lowNMU list. So you *could* consider Debian Commons as the "lowNMU team" for non team maintained packages. It wasn't my intention that packages could be maintained by Debian Commons without anyone expressing that they will care about it. That's why I said earlier in this thread that the Salvaging Process applies if you want to maintain a package in Debian Commons that you currently don't maintain. You stick your name on it as uploader and set Debian Commons as maintainer after salvaging. If you don't stick your name on it, Debian Commons as I meant it is not the thing (as documented on the Wiki [1]). I also don't intent to look after any package in Debian Commons that doesn't have my name on it, except when I run into an issue I care about.
Now, my feeling is that what tille is after is a process to orphan a package without having to go through MIA (the idea of that does make sense to me, sometimes a person isn't MIA, but still not taking care of a package). But orphaned packages are "maintained" by the QA team. I don't see why Debian Commons should be part of the equation, because we don't need two namespaces for packages without any maintainer.
Expectations for Debian Commons may change from what I intended as an outcome of discussions and that's fine (because I don't own the thing, I only announced an idea), but team maintenance of orphaned packages is *not* what *I* had in mind with it.
Paul [1] https://wiki.debian.org/DebianCommons (second bullet of "How it works")
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
