Dne 6.1.2016 v 18:45 Scott Talbert napsal(a): > On Wed, 6 Jan 2016, Vít Ondruch wrote: > >>>>> Chandan did contact him a while ago and I confirm that he did not >>>>> receive any answer. >>>>> Since maintainer is inactive for a while, I was thinking about doing >>>>> the update as provenpackager after a reasonable delay. >>>> >>>> I think this whole thread is more something for the Nonresponsive >>>> Maintainer >>>> Process than for the Change Process. >>> >>> Sure, the fact that the package maintainer isn't active is something >>> for the Nonresponsive Maintainer Process. >>> >>> This 'Change', though, is really about moving a package to a fork, >>> which I thought was something that deserved wider attention and >>> community input. >> >> Wouldn't be better to merge the fork back to upstream? Since from the >> response from the original author, one would say that he is not >> interested in maintenance anymore. > > Upstream is also unmaintained (for ~4 years). The Fedora maintainer > is also the upstream maintainer. > Yes, but the point is that the the maintainer is not nonresponsive, he just doesn't maintain the package. So he might want to give commit bit to somebody or transfer the repository ownership or something like that. Vít -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
