Dropping the ownership model

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 11/22/2011 05:59 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
> 2011/11/22 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"<johannbg at gmail.com>:
>> What do people see as pros and cons continuing to use the current
>> package ownership model?
>>
>> Would it be practical to dropping it altogether which in essence would
>> make every contributor an "proven packager"?
> Allowing any packager to commit to most packages is something that we
> could try.  There is a risk of people making undesirable changes, but
> we won't know until we try.  Also, the definition of "undesirable"
> often depends on some project-specific knowledge that is not
> documented anywhere, and having the access more open would be an
> incentive to get this documented.
>
> I wouldn't want to get rid of the ownership model altogether, I think
> there should be a specific person responsible for handling bug
> reports/RFEs.  When a group is responsible to handle something not
> really pleasant to do, often no single member of that group feels
> personally responsible.

With that move as in either to SIG or Group model I would think they 
would have to have set of representitives as in head's of the group/SIG 
which would be set of individual responsible for overseeing the group 
activity and at the same time be responsible for all the packages that 
group/SIG maintains.

JBG