Losing package maintainers (Re: [ACTION REQUIRED] Retiring packages for F-17)

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Mon, 16 Jan 2012 05:01:29 +0100
Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 at freenet.de> wrote:

> On 01/16/2012 03:20 AM, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > On Sat, 14 Jan 2012 18:28:15 +0100
> > Kevin Kofler<kevin.kofler at chello.at>  wrote:
> >
> >> Michael Schwendt wrote:
> >>> However, with the current features of pkgdb, each member of such a
> >>> group would need to "subscribe to" the package in pkgdb. Not just
> >>> for "commit" access, but also for someone to monitor bugzilla and
> >>> the package-owner mail alias, which is convenient for team-work,
> >>> too.
> >>
> >> That's exactly why we need proper support for group ownership in
> >> pkgdb. In particular, a new developer joining a SIG should
> >> AUTOMATICALLY get write access to all the packages (co)maintained
> >> by that SIG.
> 
> Exactly.
> 
> > How does one determine what SIGS exist?
> > How does one determine who is a member of a SIG?
> > How does one determine what packages a SIG controls?

> All these are the known deficiencies/missing features of Fedora's 
> infrastructure (esp. the packagedb) - there simply is no concept of 
> "group ownership".

My question is: what should the answers to these questions be?
If you could make it work however you thought it would best work how
would you answer them?

I fear there's not any good answers to them without adding more layers
to things and increasing red tape. 

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20120116/35257356/attachment.sig>