package EOL

[Kevin Kofler]

Paul <paul at ...> writes:
> Sure it's fun, but is it worth it - especially if the upstream
> maintainer has dropped the package?

And how do you stop the packager from simply setting up a web page at any free 
webspace provider or a project page at SourceForge, Savannah or wherever, 
posting updates there and declaring this the new upstream? (Upstream also being 
the packager has always been allowed, but even if you disallow it, how do you 
stop the packager for using a fake name for the "upstream"?) If someone cares 
enough about the package to get it packaged into Extras, setting up a new 
"upstream" is not a significant hurdle, having to do it is just going to annoy 
the packager for no good reason. What matters is that someone is willing to 
keep the package updated, whether it is officially the "upstream" or the 
"packager" doesn't really change anything. (I also think willingness to keep 
the package up to date is more important than development activity. If there's 
lots of development, but all done on RHL 4.0, that's not going to make it 
easier to package for devel.)

         Kevin Kofler