Am Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 05:53:37PM +0100 schrieb Chris Hofstaedtler: > On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 05:44:34PM +0100, наб wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 05:29:26PM +0100, Chris Hofstaedtler wrote: > > > On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 05:18:39PM +0100, наб wrote: > > > > Quoting the relevant: > > > > > It is recommended to choose between one of the two following schemes: > > > > > 2. Put the mailing list address in the Maintainer field. > > > > > In the Uploaders field, put the team members who care for the > > > > > package. > > > > > > > > In the packages salvaged into the salvage team we have a choice between: > > > [..] > > > > 3. Maintainer: salvage team > > > > > > > [..] > > > > 3 is a better fit for what I term dead-end packages > > > > (ones that truly no-one cares about, with no upstream, > > > > or no maintainer, or no utility, or otherwise 0 forward motion; > > > > and with little potential to generate bugs except 1 FTBFS/decade). > > > > This is most of the salvage team packages. > > > > > > Why are what you call "dead-end packages" "salvaged" at all? I seem > > > to recall that the salvaging process is for packages you actually > > > want to maintain. > > Because a more aggressive RM RoQA policy got me yelled at last time > > for making work for the ftpmasters, so I stopped arguing for RMs > > and do Andreas' preferred methodology of salvaging everything. > > > Doing this allows packages that tend to be in a functionally-orphaned > > state to be team-maintained in the long term. This satisfies the salvage > > criteria as I see them and I have an equal interest in every weird > > ancient FTBFS these packages generate. > > If you are still interested in them, then properly document this and > add yourself to Uploaders: > > Not doing this seems like a clear abuse of the ITS process to me.
Yes, indeed. The ITS process is not a process to orphan packages, it is for taking over maintainership. Long term interest in the package maintainainership is required. This is explictly spelled out in the procedures, refer to https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.en.html#package-salvaging The only process that leads to orphaned packages and has project consensus is by maintainer action or the MIA process. If a package is no longer useful, it should be removed. A removal can be announced throught the BTS in advance, for example something like https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1091838 -- tobi
