Path: csiph.com!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!srl.newsdeef.eu!news.corradoroberto.it!gothmog.csi.it!bofh.it!news.nic.it!robomod From: c.buhtz@posteo.jp Newsgroups: linux.debian.maint.python Subject: Re: [backintime] Advise about unresponsive DPM and new 1.5.6 release Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2025 09:40:01 +0100 Message-ID: References: X-Original-To: debian-python@lists.debian.org X-Mailbox-Line: From debian-python-request@lists.debian.org Thu Dec 18 08:36:14 2025 Old-Return-Path: X-Amavis-Spam-Status: No, score=-9.396 tagged_above=-10000 required=5.3 tests=[BAYES_00=-2, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FOURLA=0.1, LDO_WHITELIST=-5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Policyd-Weight: NOT_IN_SBL_XBL_SPAMHAUS=-1.5 CL_IP_EQ_HELO_IP=-2 (check from: .posteo. - helo: .mout02.posteo. - helo-domain: .posteo.) FROM/MX_MATCHES_HELO(DOMAIN)=-2; rate: -5.5 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/23511 List-ID: List-URL: List-Archive: https://lists.debian.org/msgid-search/7f0c8726d196f7652a6fc3c1659a8e2e@posteo.de Approved: robomod@news.nic.it Lines: 19 Organization: linux.* mail to news gateway Sender: robomod@news.nic.it X-Original-Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2025 08:35:55 +0000 X-Original-Message-ID: <7f0c8726d196f7652a6fc3c1659a8e2e@posteo.de> X-Original-References: <4737412.LvFx2qVVIh@soren-desktop> Xref: csiph.com linux.debian.maint.python:17274 Hello Soren and Thomas, thank you very much for your feedback and kind words. Even this is somehow helpful for me and my mood. In my understanding the DPT would take over the package but only if the current maintainer says OK to it. Anyway. The maintainer is not inactive but only not responsive. I think I need to live with it. I need to monitor the situation even further. I also think that upstream maintainers shouldn't do Debian maintenance also. An upstream maintainer is IMHO not objective enough. But I also know this is not reality today. I can speak only for myself I shouldn't do both jobs. To risky to introduce or break things by accident. Regards, Christian Buhtz