[aur-general] value of "charity" package ownership?

[Ray Kohler]

On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 7:20 PM, Daniel J Griffiths
<ghost1227 at archlinux.us>wrote:

> Ray Kohler wrote:
>
>> For a while now, I've been adopting packages that I'm not actually
>> interested in, and in some cases don't really even understand, just
>> because
>> I have the time to help out and want to be a nice guy. I'm having second
>> thoughts about the wisdom of this. Should I orphan these packages, on the
>> off-chance that somebody more appropriate wants to own them? Is a mediocre
>> maintainer better than no maintainer?
>>
>>
>>
> If you feel the need to abandon a package or two, feel free to let us
> know... someone will probably be happy to take them off your hands. :P


Ok, I've orphaned the following packages, which are ether difficult in some
way for me, or for which I would be unable to support any problems users may
find:

dvdwizard
eclim
festival-hts-voices
ffmpeg-pspvc
go-oo-bin-base
krb5-crypto
lib32-freeglut
lib32-gmp
lib32-jdk
lib32-libasyncns
lib32-libcap
lib32-libopenssl2
lib32-libsasl
lib32-libvorbis
lib32-libxp
lib32-pulseaudio
lib32-xulrunner
libcapi20
libtorrent-unstable
megamario
nspluginwrapper-ubuntu
paq8
poco
qtjambi
shrip
sysbench
task
veusz
vilefault
virtualbox_bin_additions
x264-pspvc