On Wed, Oct 10, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > So, reading this thread (which was surprisingly quiet, given the topic), > it seems that everybody agrees that such a procedure would be a good > thing (nobody had fundamental concerns). But now we have two proposed > procedures: > - one which is based on a set of criterias > - one which is based on seconds
There is also my proposal: http://bugs.debian.org/681833 It's not perfect, and I'm open to suggestions and improvements, but I think it has some important advantages over the above. One is that piggybacks on existing NMU procedures (so it's not really new, but refines the existing process). Another is that it is fully autonomous: whoever has interest to do the work is empowered to just go ahead and do it. In other words, let the best code win. The third is that its already been tested in practice: the wine package being successfully salvaged without instigating any kind of adversarial reaction by the salvager (myself) and the existing maintainer. There are some worries in that bug log about too much deference to the tech committee in case of disputes. That is certainly a valid concern, but presumably that is one of the tech committees primary roles, and the goal of that wording is to direct parties in the right direction toward a resolution in those cases. Best wishes, Mike -- 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/CANTw=mnl76la8txgenge5tytuyxvovicl4h-74qiu5dqthc...@mail.gmail.com
