>From the [Debian Policy Manual](https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-binary.html):
> An orphaned package is one with no current maintainer. Orphaned packages should have their Maintainer control field set to Debian QA Group <packages@qa.debian.org>. These packages are considered maintained by the Debian project as a whole until someone else volunteers to take over maintenance.
The above is official policy. It references the Debian Developer's Reference, which is considered non-normative but best practice. The relevant sections are [5.9.4, Orphaning a package](
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch05.en.html#orphaning) and [5.9.5, Adopting a package](
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch05.en.html#adopting) (I note that the situation with `usb_cam` may have been considered by Debian to be package hijacking). Also relevant is [7.4, Dealing with inactive and/or unreachable maintainers](
https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/ch07.en.html#mia-qa).
I think the Debian policy and procedure sounds good. It requires a bit of infrastructure work, but nothing too burdensome. It relies on having a known "QA group" but I feel that the OSRF could fill this role.
---
[Visit Topic](
https://discourse.ros.org/t/releasing-repositories-form-other-people/1797/4) or reply to this email to respond.
If you do not want to receive messages from ros-users please use the unsubscribe link below. If you use the one above, you will stop all of ros-users from receiving updates.
______________________________________________________________________________
ros-users mailing list
ros-users@lists.ros.org
http://lists.ros.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-users
Unsubscribe: <
http://lists.ros.org/mailman//options/ros-users>
(text/plain)