Question about "what to do if mantainer is absent"

"J├│hann B. Gu├░mundsson" johannbg at
Tue May 14 17:13:54 UTC 2013

On 05/14/2013 01:51 PM, Simone Caronni wrote:
> I have a question about the unresponsive mantainer policy [1].

The unresponsive maintainers policy is to be honest crap and to much in 
favor of the maintainer.

Fesco allegedly was looking into it but you know...

What really is needed here is to drop the user ownership module 
altogether and allow every contribute access to every component or use 
group ownership model on components instead followed by an email address 
component at fedoraproject which is the components email address and is 
stored in a imap folder.

Contributes could easily be added or allowed to add themselves to 
components group and subscribed to the components imap folder in the 
process which yields far more and faster access to start participate and 
contributing then the current implemented model does.

Atleast you would not have to run around half the internet chasing the 
maintainer just to try to see if he's active or not and if you can fix 
or generally start working on the component he's allegedly supposed to 
be maintaining.

If efficiency was Fedora's strong suit FPC would have been dismantled by 


More information about the devel mailing list