Automating the NonResponsiveMaintainers policy

Toshio Kuratomi a.badger at
Fri Mar 2 15:21:56 UTC 2012

On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 12:37:40PM +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 03/02/2012 12:03 PM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> >
> >Are the changes enforced? I don't think so ...
> Interesting which begs the question to which purpose do the guideline
> serve if no one is actually making sure that it's being followed?
Process looks like this:

* Guidelines updated
* Someone notices that the package does not follow the guidelines (Note that
  this step does not require that the Guidelines were updated... the
  packaging bug could have been missed during review or been introduced
* That person files a bug.
* If the maintainer chooses to ignore the bug or refuse to fix it then the
  matter is escalated.
  - In an ideal world, it would probably go to FPC as a "can we change the
    guidelines?  I have this special case which I don't think you intended."
  - In a less ideal world, or in  the case where the FPC has already made
    clear that they did intend it to apply in that case, it would fall on
    FESCo to enforce the decision.

How would fesco enforce the decision?  That would depend on the arguments
being made and the maintainer attitude.  For instance, if the maintainer
said, I simply don't have time to fix this, "enforcement" would probably
that someone would fix it for them and apply the patch to the spec file.

OTOH, if the maintainer decided that they were going to revert any change
made to the package to fix the issue, FESCo would have to remove the
maintainer from the package and tell them they could not be a committer on
that package for a period of time.  They might even remove the packager from
the packager group if the maintainer was uncooperative enough.enough.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <>

More information about the devel mailing list