Orphaned packages not! (splat, gpsman, nec2c)

[Patrice Dumas]

On Fri, Jun 06, 2008 at 12:22:04PM -0400, Steve Grubb wrote:
> 
> This is not a typical non-responsive maintainer problem. His email account 
> listed on the package db entry is closed for a fact. So, why follow a 
> proceedure that will take a few weeks when I know for a fact that I need to 
> reassign some packages?  :)

It is true that it is not the typical non responsive policy, but I think
that it is covered nevertheless, with a bit of interpretation. If you 
remove the reference to the bug which doesn't make sense, indeed one
gets:

 Others can add to the bug that they also were not
 successful in contacting the maintainer, or providing additional contact
 information for the maintainer (ie, alternative email, irc, etc). 

> I suspect the orphaning process should be followed in cases like this - but 
> before its too late.

I don't think it makes much sense.

I'll try to make a proposal soon to cover that in the Non-responsive 
Maintainer Policy.

--
Pat