On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 12:30:11PM +0300, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2017 at 11:01:24AM +0200, Bill Allombert wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 04:22:41PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > > Bill Allombert <ballo...@debian.org> writes:
> > > > On Wed, Aug 02, 2017 at 05:48:15PM -0400, Sean Whitton wrote:
> > >
> > > >> I've also included a purely informative change which emphasises that
> > > >> packages that are team maintained in name only should be orphaned
> > > >> properly, with their maintainer field set to the QA team. This is
> > > >> already current best practice, but it's worth emphasising, because one
> > > >> might fail to orphan a package on the grounds that "someone else on the
> > > >> team might fix it", which is not true of a lot of teams.
> > >
> > > > You are omitting the case of a team which get reduced to a single
> > > > member, in which case the package need not be orphaned. Yet it is
> > > > important the fact is mentionned in the package.
> > >
> > > I don't think I understand the objection. Sean's proposed wording seems
> > > fine for that case -- it just says that the package should be orphaned if
> > > the team is not maintaining it, which shouldn't depend on the size of the
> > > team.
> >
> > The patch also remove the requirement to list individual email of the
> > maintainers. That is what I am objecting to.
> >
> > When a team is reduced to a single individual, it is no more a team, yet
> > the package is still maintained and need not be orphaned.
>
> Your objection does not make sense.
>
> The change Sean is proposing is intended to make providing the
> information about team members in Uploaders: optional.
>
> If are not objecting to removing the information about who is in a team,
> you cannot suggest that anything should be done based on the no longer
> existing information about the number of team members.
Re-reading, I might understand what caused the misunderstanding:
This bug is about making providing the information about team members
in Uploaders: optional.
That's the core point discussed.
The part you were referring to is an attempt from Sean to address some
problems caused by this change. This is not a standalone proposal.
If Uploaders: stays mandatory, we do not need new rules for orphaning
team maintained packages that compensate for the no longer available
information about team membership.
cu
Adrian
--
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed
