On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 05:54:51AM +0800, Ray Rashif wrote:
On 24 September 2010 05:07, Heiko Baums <lists@baums-on-web.de> wrote:
Now, to clarify: Bumping a package everytime there is a version is the *definition* of maintaining a package.
Of course this is the definition of maintaining a package. But this doesn't have to be done within 2 or 3 hours after upstream has released a new version. And an orphan request shouldn't be sent 2 or 3 hours after upstream has released the new version.
That is _not_ the "definition" of "maintaining a package", it is "part" of the maintenance. Everyone has a life, and everyone has a choice. This is the bazaar.
It is correct that rapid action is applauded, but it is not a requirement for ownership of a package. If anyone is unhappy with the frequency or time it takes for the owner to update her package(s), the concerned can either update the copy of the buildscripts locally and inform everyone else how to do it, or, request to orphan the package so she can help maintain instead and provide the rapid action which was previously lacking. Of course, that does not mean we would gladly comply with such a request.
I don't think what I'm saying here is being clearly understood. :-( Updating a package each time there is a release *is* maintaining the package, only without the title of a "package maintainer". The point I am trying to bring across is that if you are going to be doing everything that a package maintainer does, then adopt the package so people can contact you correctly and such! I'm sorry if it is a misunderstanding on my part, but I fail to see really any other aspect of being a package maintainer besides maintaining the package! (Except maybe the responsibility of maintaining it, but if you plan on updating it anyway, like Det wanted to, then that shouldn't matter) Also, I doubt clicking the "Adopt" button would affect your life in any way if you are already doing the dirty work of maintaining it! Thanks, Brad