Home > Archive > PHP PEAR Questions and Answers > October 2005 > Re: [PEAR-QA] Orphan packages
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Re: [PEAR-QA] Orphan packages
|
|
| bertrand Gugger 2005-10-14, 3:56 am |
| Bonjour,
Arnaud Limbourg wrote:
>Hello,
>
>Yesterday pear.php.net was updated to allow packages leads or the QA
>team to mark a package as either unmaintained or superceeded.
>
>The new maintainer guide will be updated with a paragraph about how tp
>take over an unmaintained package.
>
>This goes inline with RFC: Orphaned packages[1].
>
>[1] http://pear.php.net/pepr/pepr-proposal-show.php?id=192
>
>
>
Just a note, again, a package with *2* (at least) parents has less
chances to become orphan.
I still consider any package with a single maintainer as potentially
dangerous.
The policy should be allways to require a "backup" maintainer/lead.
That's what I offered, and do for Robert Peake on Net_Monitor and moosh
for Validate_BE.
All maintainers should be urged to do the same.
Btw, I'm searching co-leads for Benchmark and Text_Wiki_BBCode ...
My *2* cents :)
--
bertrand "toggg" Gugger
| |
| Arnaud Limbourg 2005-10-14, 7:56 am |
| > Just a note, again, a package with *2* (at least) parents has less
> chances to become orphan.
> I still consider any package with a single maintainer as potentially
> dangerous.
> The policy should be allways to require a "backup" maintainer/lead.
> That's what I offered, and do for Robert Peake on Net_Monitor and moosh
> for Validate_BE.
> All maintainers should be urged to do the same.
>
> Btw, I'm searching co-leads for Benchmark and Text_Wiki_BBCode ...
Yes, but this is outside the scope of my email. You are talking about a
general rule about package maintainership, I am talking about orphan
packages :)
Arnaud.
|
|
|
|
|