On 29/03/24 at 23:29 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > The sad irony here is that the xz maintainer tried to do exactly what we > advise people in this situation to do: try to add a comaintainer to share > the work, and don't block work because you don't have time to personally > vet everything in detail. This is *exactly* why maintainers often don't > want to do that, and thus force people to fork packages rather than join > in maintaining the existing package.
Yes. In that specific case, the original xz maintainer (Lasse Collin) was socially-pressed by a likely fake person (Jigar Kumar) to do the "right thing" and hand over maintenance. https://www.mail-archive.com/xz-devel@tukaani.org/msg00566.html I wonder if "Dennis Enn" is also a fake person. In retrospect, that email looks suspicious: On 2022-06-21 Dennis Ens wrote: > Why not pass on maintainership for XZ for C so you can give XZ for > Java more attention? Or pass on XZ for Java to someone else to focus > on XZ for C? Trying to maintain both means that neither are > maintained well. Lucas
