[Reportbug-maint] Bug#712552: reportbug: Please describe difference between RFA and O better

[Geoffrey Thomas]

Package: reportbug
Version: 6.4.4
Tags: patch

Dear wonderful maintainers,

On #debian-mentors the other day, I learned that there's a consensus that 
RFA is not merely a less-urgent version of O, but that in an RFA, the 
package maintainer retains the right to decide their successor and the 
package isn't up for immediate adoption by anyone who wants. See
   http://lists.debian.org/debian-qa/2012/09/msg00055.html
for some discussion.

I think I'd gotten the impression that RFA and O were equivalent except 
for urgency from the WNPP website
   http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/
which, in part, quotes reportbug's output:

2 O    The package has been `Orphaned'. It needs a new maintainer as
        soon as possible.
3 RFA  This is a `Request for Adoption'. Due to lack of time,
        resources, interest or something similar, the current
        maintainer is asking for someone else to maintain this
        package. They will maintain it in the meantime, but perhaps
        not in the best possible way. In short: the package needs a
        new maintainer.

This description, especially the last sentence, doesn't make the 
distinction clear. Can the text be rephrased to clarify that RFA is about 
soliciting volunteers, and not an open call for anyone to take over the 
package like O?

Attached is a patch that rephrases both of these descriptions to make the 
difference a little more distinct. In particular, it clarifies that the 
maintainer remains with RFA but not O, adds the word "prospective" before 
"new maintainer" in the RFA description, and drops the "In short" 
sentence. If you have alternate phrasing that you prefer, I'd be happy 
with that too.

I'll also follow up with a patch to the website to incorporate the text 
you decide on including, and also explicitly state that the appropriate 
response to an RFA is to contact the maintainer, instead of unilaterally 
retitling to ITA as the page currently suggests. (If you're planning on 
taking my phrasing, it'd be great if you could ack my patch promptly even 
if you don't commit it immediately, so I can use that phrasing in my patch 
to update the website.)

Thanks,
-- 
Geoffrey Thomas
http://ldpreload.com
geofft at ldpreload.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 0001-Update-wnpp-text-to-clarify-distinction-between-RFA-and-O.patch
Type: text/x-diff
Size: 1895 bytes
Desc: 
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/reportbug-maint/attachments/20130616/fe9eebb1/attachment.patch>