concept of package "ownership"

[Jesse Keating]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 7/1/10 6:18 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> I think we need to get rid of the concept of ownership entirely, that'd also 
> make orphaned or de-facto orphaned packages less of a problem. You see a 
> problem, you fix it. Who cares whether the package has an active maintainer 
> or not?

While I agree that package "ownership" should not feel possessive, I do
strongly feel that there still should be some single person (or team I
suppose...) who is ultimately responsible for the package.  A place for
bug reports, for autoqa activity, for reviewing potential patches and
changes from other people, etc...

- -- 
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkwtaF8ACgkQ4v2HLvE71NXCCwCgxoNtzgQ/DDpx78uI4jjodHSu
GTYAnAxN9OwDW/qnXMDnZKfp4zCNG8NO
=F1ef
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----