1 |
El dom, 04-03-2012 a las 14:06 +0100, Ulrich Mueller escribió: |
2 |
> >>>>> On Sun, 04 Mar 2012, Pacho Ramos wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> > Even if they have some people in their mail aliases, looks like |
5 |
> > herds are empty. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> Sorry for nitpicking, but a "herd" is a collection of packages. So the |
8 |
> herds are not empty, but they have no maintainers. |
9 |
|
10 |
Well, I knew what a "herd" means exactly per devmanual ;), but, in real |
11 |
world, that "collection of packages" is really orphan (are like |
12 |
maintainer-needed packages but, what is worse, out of radar as they are |
13 |
not listed as orphan at all) |
14 |
|
15 |
(Personally I completely disagree with that sense of "herd" but, as |
16 |
looks the meaning is there since the beginning...) |
17 |
|
18 |
> |
19 |
> > If nobody volunteers to join to them, I think we should drop that |
20 |
> > herds and move their packages to maintainer-needed in a week or so. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> > What do you think? |
23 |
> |
24 |
> How many packages are in these two herds? If it's only a few, then |
25 |
> this certainly makes sense. |
26 |
> |
27 |
> Ulrich |
28 |
> |
29 |
> |
30 |
|
31 |
Only two for net-zope, but many more for, for example, sgml and |
32 |
media-optical. |