[aur-general] Orphaning request - chromium-beta and clamav-devel
schiv at archlinux.org
Thu Sep 23 17:54:51 EDT 2010
On 24 September 2010 05:07, Heiko Baums <lists at 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.
>From the way I see it, complaints about delays usually come from those
using an AUR helper. This is because it breaks their habit of getting
the package retrieved, built, and installed with one command upon
receiving the RSS feed of an upstream release announcement.
> And one (in this case Det) should decide if one wants to maintain the
> package or not. That is, one shouldn't adopt a package, update it,
> orphan it, wait until the package is adopted by someone else, and then
> send an orphan request to the mailing list, because the new maintainer
> of a package which oneself doesn't use doesn't update it within 2 or 3
That is not what I call "sane behaviour". Something must be wrong somewhere.
More information about the aur-general