Bug#553898: dogtail: Should this package be orphaned?
Hi Andrew, On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 09:37:02PM -0500, Andrew Starr-Bochicchio wrote: While reviewing some packages, your package came up as a package that should maybe be orphaned by its maintainer, because: * Out of date with upstream. * Buggy. (1 RC bug). * NPOASR. (Never part of a stable release). * Low popcon. If you think that it should be removed from Debian instead of being orphaned, please reply to this bug and tell so. If you disagree and want to continue to maintain this package, please close this bug and do an upload also fixing the other issues. I just came across this package. It's been three years since this bug was reported with no response from the maintainer. Nor have there been any maintainer uploads of the package in this time. There are also unanswered bugs that are even older than this. Though the maintainer is not completely MIA. He has uploaded other packages within the last year. [1] The package is no longer RC-buggy and /has/ been part of a stable release, though this is only because of the action of NMUers. I've added them to Cc: Mehdi, Bastian, do you have any personal interest in the dogtail package, and opinion on whether it should be orphaned? If it were orphaned, would either of you be interested in adopting it? I certainly don't think low popcon is an argument for orphaning the package - it might be an argument for removing the package, but isn't a very strong one by itself. Likewise, unanswered non-RC bugs are not by themselves a reason for orphaning a package. However, there's also bug #585287 which has gone unanswered and may actually be a serious issue in the package. José Carlos, are you still interested in maintaining dogtail? You haven't uploaded it in 6 years, and it does seem to be in need of attention. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Bug#553898: dogtail: Should this package be orphaned?
I will do a proper orphan of a bunch of packages soon, as I am completely our of time. But in the meanwhile take this mail as an orphan bug report in wnpp. Thanks and sorry for the inconvenience. And merry Xmas. El 24/12/2012 19:30, Steve Langasek vor...@debian.org escribió: Hi Andrew, On Sun, Dec 16, 2012 at 09:37:02PM -0500, Andrew Starr-Bochicchio wrote: While reviewing some packages, your package came up as a package that should maybe be orphaned by its maintainer, because: * Out of date with upstream. * Buggy. (1 RC bug). * NPOASR. (Never part of a stable release). * Low popcon. If you think that it should be removed from Debian instead of being orphaned, please reply to this bug and tell so. If you disagree and want to continue to maintain this package, please close this bug and do an upload also fixing the other issues. I just came across this package. It's been three years since this bug was reported with no response from the maintainer. Nor have there been any maintainer uploads of the package in this time. There are also unanswered bugs that are even older than this. Though the maintainer is not completely MIA. He has uploaded other packages within the last year. [1] The package is no longer RC-buggy and /has/ been part of a stable release, though this is only because of the action of NMUers. I've added them to Cc: Mehdi, Bastian, do you have any personal interest in the dogtail package, and opinion on whether it should be orphaned? If it were orphaned, would either of you be interested in adopting it? I certainly don't think low popcon is an argument for orphaning the package - it might be an argument for removing the package, but isn't a very strong one by itself. Likewise, unanswered non-RC bugs are not by themselves a reason for orphaning a package. However, there's also bug #585287 which has gone unanswered and may actually be a serious issue in the package. José Carlos, are you still interested in maintaining dogtail? You haven't uploaded it in 6 years, and it does seem to be in need of attention. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developerhttp://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
Bug#553898: dogtail: Should this package be orphaned?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 12/24/2012 07:26 PM, Steve Langasek wrote: The package is no longer RC-buggy and /has/ been part of a stable release, though this is only because of the action of NMUers. I've added them to Cc: Mehdi, Bastian, do you have any personal interest in the dogtail package, and opinion on whether it should be orphaned? If it were orphaned, would either of you be interested in adopting it? I NMUed it only to get the python-apt transition done, iirc. I have no real interest in this package. Regards, - -- Mehdi -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJQ2MgNAAoJEDe1GR0FRlJoPZgH/isyHbSxU6OkRcNrqHkptsQN 3AtRfZecEWl8DR3mbhFAEfEEkNPqY3CgCfw70qu9n9lJPyve0Ll0xedum1KCOdyF 2zZU94b4kEoSUjRLYpbKdh1bElR1YDAOJ670LN735dktQZl+9E3ylM4FcWUCyWbs JwKuwRUFJiHfVeruB0wML6ou6+gZfNaguRDX+k3LpKtc4qeJgFsFIW7f1NJ/XYKS eilfJEoY7ZsYYCyGgboE9K30xcDDu0TlKNX9Q2v5wnIv7AsbmUfUan7P2QEeqXT2 FBwxyh4MWO2gMtkNieX3njobsn5pKUpPk4sb0hLFGXE+itN0G+JRDtaALVjSHHI= =HthM -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#553898: dogtail: Should this package be orphaned?
Package: dogtail Version: 0.6.1-3 Severity: important User: debian...@lists.debian.org Usertags: proposed-orphan Dear Maintainer, While reviewing some packages, your package came up as a package that should maybe be orphaned by its maintainer, because: * Out of date with upstream. * Buggy. (1 RC bug). * NPOASR. (Never part of a stable release). * Low popcon. If you think that it should be removed from Debian instead of being orphaned, please reply to this bug and tell so. If you disagree and want to continue to maintain this package, please close this bug and do an upload also fixing the other issues. I just came across this package. It's been three years since this bug was reported with no response from the maintainer. Nor have there been any maintainer uploads of the package in this time. There are also unanswered bugs that are even older than this. Though the maintainer is not completely MIA. He has uploaded other packages within the last year. [1] Any plans to go ahead and orphan it? CCing debian-qa for guidance on how to proceed. Just to be clear. I have no intention to adopt this myself. I just think that it is important to correctly reflect the status of a package. [1] http://packages.qa.debian.org/r/rdup/news/2026T101815Z.html Thanks! -- Andrew Starr-Bochicchio Ubuntu Developer https://launchpad.net/~andrewsomething Debian Developer http://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=asb PGP/GPG Key ID: D53FDCB1 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Bug#553898: dogtail: Should this package be orphaned (or removed)?
Package: dogtail Version: 0.6.1-3 Severity: important User: debian...@lists.debian.org Usertags: proposed-orphan Dear Maintainer, While reviewing some packages, your package came up as a package that should maybe be orphaned by its maintainer, because: * Out of date with upstream. * Buggy. (1 RC bug). * NPOASR. (Never part of a stable release). * Low popcon. If you think that it should be removed from Debian instead of being orphaned, please reply to this bug and tell so. If you disagree and want to continue to maintain this package, please close this bug and do an upload also fixing the other issues. Also, you can study the possibility of taking co-maintainers. If you agree that it should be orphaned, send the following commands to cont...@bugs.debian.org (replace nn with this bug's number): severity nn normal reassign nn wnpp retitle nn O: packagename -- short package description thanks If you think it should be removed, send the following commands instead: severity nn normal reassign nn ftp.debian.org retitle nn RM: packagename -- RoM; reasons thanks For more information, see http://www.debian.org/doc/developers-reference/ch-pkgs.en.html#s-archive-manip http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/ Thank you, Barry deFreese Debian QA -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
