On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 22:27 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 22:19 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Tom spot Callaway (tcallawa(a)redhat.com) said:
> > On Thu, 2008-04-24 at 21:48 -0400, seth vidal wrote:
> > > it would mean a namespace conflict b/t people whose username is
> > > and the package.
> > >
> > > probably best to have packagename(a)packages.fedoraproject.org
> > Yep. Seems like a good idea.
> Or <pkg>-owner/<pkg>-maintainers. Something unlikely to have
> a username collision.
one hang up I realized: the owner for a package under EL5 may not
necessarily equal the owner under F9.
should it just go to all maintainers/co-maintainers on every release?
Perhaps just the rawhide owners?