Hello Felix,

I agree that the changes are made into a single patch.

Now that no human being is actively maintaining this package, I think it is 
effectively orphaned. pkg-java team is unable to be responsible for the package 
because nobody *is* pkg-java. Changing the maintainer to Debian QA Group does 
not seem incorrect to me.

However, I'm curious about the situation when someone wants to upload a simple 
change to an orphaned package. Do people refrain from it or they simply do a 
non-maintainer upload?

Felix Natter 於 2017/9/5 上午3:35 寫道:
> 殷啟聰 | Kai-Chung Yan <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Hello Natter,
> hi Kai,
> thanks for the reply.
>
> s/Natter/Felix/g ;-) (my first name is Felix)
>
>> Since it's just one commit, I suggest you put it as a patch in
>> `debian/patches`. When someone is updating the package to 2.5.0, she
>> can just remove it.
> There is already a 2.4.8-2 in the git pipeline (unreleased) by Miguel
> Landaeta (CC):
>   https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-java/groovy.git
>
> In the corresponding bug for 2.4.8-2 (#871857) Miguel says:
>
> "I removed myself from uploaders list and prepared a tentative QA upload
> but I didn't upload it to the archive since the resulting package would
> be in violation of Debian Policy (§3.3 and §5.6.3). I'd appreciate if
> somebody else can step in as maintainer."
>
> Policy §5.6.3 says:
> "This is normally an optional field, but if the Maintainer control field
> names a group of people and a shared email address, the Uploaders field
> must be present and must contain at least one human with their personal
> email address."
>
> --> groovy currently only has:
>   Maintainer: Debian Java Maintainers 
> <[email protected]>
>  (no Uploader:)
> which seems to violate §5.6.3. So how can we make a policy-compliant
> team upload without becoming maintainer (I'd like to avoid taking over
> groovy maintainership if possible)?
>
> Shall we set
>   Maintainer: Debian QA Group <[email protected]>
> according to Policy §3.3, even if we usually do team uploads?
>
> Other than that: @Miguel, @Emmanuel, @Kai: do you agree to make a simple
> 2.4.8-2 release with Miguel's changes only adding that patch?
>
> Thanks and Best Regards,


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to