On Wed, Jun 29, 2022 at 2:30 PM Vitaly Zaitsev via devel devel@lists.fedoraproject.org wrote:
On 29/06/2022 21:06, Stephen Smoogen wrote:
Maintainers are custodians and do not own the package.
This becomes true with the new EPEL policy. I think it should be revisited to follow Fedora's non-responsive maintainer procedure with an explicit FESCo approval on a case-by-case basis.
It was true before the EPEL stalled policy. Fedora is all of our distribution. No one owns packages, we maintain them.
Requiring FESCo sign off for this on every package would significantly hamper EPEL growth. We're not going to do that.
The origin of this policy is that the full unresponsive maintainer process is overkill for getting a package added to EPEL. Maintainer1 shouldn't have to suggest that all of maintainer2's packages be orphaned or assigned to themselves in order to be added as a collaborator on an EPEL branch.
If you don't like the policy, then you can avoid it simply by handling EPEL branch requests promptly (faster than 3 weeks).
-- Sincerely, Vitaly Zaitsev (vitaly@easycoding.org) _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure