For such cases there's the NMU I believe: https://github.com/haskell-infra/hackage-trustees/blob/master/policy.md#3-so... On February 17, 2021 8:15:17 PM UTC, Thomas DuBuisson wrote:

I know, right? I thought I addressed that - happy to wait a few weeks to see if the maintainer comes back on line (that makes it well over a month) and I'm really not looking to be "the" maintainer. For any package that aspires to be used in production it shouldn't be hard to get fixes to critical bugs upstream in weeks and people do deserve vacations so that's why I volunteered to co-maintain. Also, following Oleg's lead, the exact intended actions are included in the request so everyone's clear even when the changes are low volume.

On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 10:05 AM Emily Pillmore wrote:

...

I should hope that if i go on vacation, my packages are not in jeopardy. That seems like a ridiculously short time to wait before trying a takeover.

On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 11:54 AM, Thomas DuBuisson < thomas.dubuisson@gmail.com> wrote:

...

I ask to take comaintainership of the four selda-* packages on hackage.

While Anton was active months ago there are fixes that have languished for three weeks. I haven't heard from Anton in over a month, including on my offer to co-maintain a couple weeks back. It isn't my intent to full take over, just help maintain.

My first points of action would be: - Merge the three most recent PRs of two critical bug fixes and a clean up. These would have to go on my own fork for the time being. - Release

I know 3 weeks is short in the Haskell world for a package takeover. I only want to co-maintain and am ready to wait a while after sending this message in to see if Anton (CCed) awakens.

-Tom

_______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries

These packages are a community good, but maintained as a community service. It's definitely best practice to have a few maintainers but this isn't the venue. One should contact the existing maintainers directly and ask to become a co-maintainer. Unless the maintainer becomes demonstrably absent it is against policy to interfere in the current maintainers' approach. If a package lacks co-maintainers and/or refuses them, is slow to apply fixes, etc, one should probably fork the package or choose another. The only real exceptions to this are core packages as under the maintenance of the CLC. Anything else would be a discussion about a massive change in policy. -davean On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 3:33 PM Sven Panne wrote:

Am Mi., 17. Feb. 2021 um 21:19 Uhr schrieb Thomas DuBuisson < thomas.dubuisson@gmail.com>:

...

I know, right? I thought I addressed that - happy to wait a few weeks to see if the maintainer comes back on line (that makes it well over a month) [...]

Regardless of how urgent issues might be for you, I think that a lag of "a few weeks" is totally fine for any project out there maintained by somebody who does this in his spare time. You can be on a longer vacation, be ill for a few weeks, have something urgent things in your family/"real" work, and when you come back you suddenly have a co-maintainer you perhaps don't want? Have a release with some fixes perhaps going in the wrong direction? I would be extremely annoyed by such actions, and I'm sure I'm not alone with this. Doing such harsh measures in such a short time span is probably doing the project more harm than good.

If you really need a fix quickly, just fork the project and build from there for a while... Note: The last release of the packages in question is not even a month ago. _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/libraries