On Tue, Jan 30, 2024 at 1:46 PM Stephen Gallagher <sgallagh(a)redhat.com> wrote:
One additional point I forgot to address: the initial concern was
that
the KDE SIG would be implicitly responsible for maintaining these
packages if they are included in the main repository. From a purely
technical perspective, I think that we should state clearly that the
KDE SIG would be required only to provide advance notice of major
changes but would NOT be responsible for ensuring that these packages
adapt to them. Of course, communicating that to users is harder (and
they'll naturally report bugs to the wrong place in many cases), but I
think the KDE SIG is completely permitted to refuse and retarget any
issues that come up to the appropriate group.
I would suggest that it is entirely reasonable
that there be a threshold where if users
continually report bugs that the KDE SIG
must deal with (i.e. someone else's packages
are causing excessive overhead for the SIG,
even just to close/retarget the bugs/issues)
that they can petition that the offending
packages get suspended/removed. I don't
know what that threshold will be, but I
suspect the SIG will know it when they see
it. I would suggest that the packager of
those other packages monitors all new
bugs/issues and "takes" them early and
often to insure that the SIG is not unduly
burdened, and the threshold petition would
never need to be considered.