On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 8:48 AM, Jeroen Roovers <[email protected]> wrote: > The (slightly rhetorical) question was how an understaffed team could > be realistically expected to start maintaining ebuilds. Your entire > reply missed that point. > > The answer to the question is that you can't. A package maintainer > cannot burden an understaffed team with more work. They are > understaffed, so they will not do the work, and the maintainer has an > itch to scratch (stop maintaining an older version of a package). > Now guess who will be actually doing the work.
Well, they can assign the burden to an understaffed team if the team wants them to. Perhaps an intermediate solution is that when a STABLEREQ gets stale the maintainer posts in it their intention to drop the old version in 30 days. The maintainer has to wait at least that long, and if during that time a minor arch team asks them to keep the old version around then all relevant bugs get reassigned to them, otherwise the maintainer is free to delete it. That leaves the choice with the minor arch team, with deletion being the default. Honestly, I'd probably be fine with the maintainer breaking the arch stable tree when removing the package. The arch stable tree isn't really stable in the first place if nobody is caring for it, and there really aren't any pretty solutions to that problem. Rich
