Ray Rashif wrote:
I don't think what I'm saying here is being clearly understood. :-(
Sorry, I missed the whole Det business. All in all, that kind of contribution (what Det appears to be doing) is not encouraged, but it _is_ somewhat of a contribution. From the way I see it, he's just a concerned party, preemptive about the fate of a particular package.
But yes, he's definitely not maintaining any package if all he does is adopt, update, disown. He's just Robin Hood, or..
It's like feeding a stray cat. You might not want to or be able to adopt it and take care of it full-time, but you don't want to let it starve to death either, so you keep feeding it while hoping someone else will adopt it and take care of it instead. When someone finally does, you get upset when you notice that the cat isn't being fed and that you can no longer feed it yourself because it's locked up indoors, so you call [AR]SPCA (or PETA, if you're really upset). The only unreasonable factor here is the impatience. If you camp outside the new owner's house and start screaming about animal abuse as soon as the owner is more than half an hour late, something's wrong. Ok, I may have stretched that a little too far. Analogies aside, if the package was that important to you and you were effectively maintaining it anyway, then you should have just kept it until someone else offered to maintain it (or you no longer could). Disowning a package generally nullifies your future bitching rights regarding the maintenance of that package. Btw, this is my new favorite quote:
There's no miscommunication at least not on my side.
The sincerity makes it an instant classic. XD