Draft of maintainer and sponsor responsibility policies

[Patrice Dumas]

On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 02:08:36PM -0500, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> 
> packager group.  We want to encourage more sponsors to take on people that are
> not yet good packagers but have the potential to grow into good packagers with
> a little mentoring.
> 
> Updated policy drafts are here:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_sponsor_responsibilities%28draft%29

It is not clear to me how the changes in the draft policies address this
issue.

More precisely, I agree that, in the current policy, 
'Make sure the maintainers you sponsor follow guidelines'
and 
'  Fix issues caused by sponsored maintainers '
'Help answer maintainers' questions'
are redundant. So it is a good thing to merge them. But I don't think that
'Make sure the maintainers you sponsor follow guidelines' put more 
pressure on the maintainer than what is in the draft in 
'  Fix issues in sponsored maintainers' packages '
(although explicitly saying that solving an issue may be finding other
sources of information is good).

Moreover, I think that in the draft some aspects of sponsoree help have 
been removed (they were in 'Make sure the maintainers you sponsor follow guidelines'
and weren't put in another section), I think that they should be readded. 
More precisely, I think that

'sponsors should guide the sponsored maintainer to do the best choices in packaging and reviewing, and to follow the guidelines.'

should be readded in '  Help answer maintainers questions '.

Also the information on how to watch the sponsoree in bugzilla should
be kept, in my opinion, but put in a specific section and explicitly marked
as optionnal.

I can implement the changes that are agreed.

--
Pat