Question about "what to do if mantainer is absent"

Kevin Fenzi kevin at scrye.com
Tue May 14 17:45:40 UTC 2013


On Tue, 14 May 2013 17:13:54 +0000
"J├│hann B. Gu├░mundsson" <johannbg at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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...

Yeah, I sure do know... Fesco folks are busy and doing lots of things
in the areas they contribute to, so if people really want to move things
forward, perhaps they should work on some ideas themselves?

> 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.

There's a number of problems with 'free for all' model. Mostly around
communication. 

pkgdb2 is being worked on that does some good toward teams/groups of
maintainers for a package (there's no 'owner' anymore, just a 'initial
bugzilla contact'). I'll let the folks working on that speak to that
tho. 

I have no idea what you mean by imap folder here. 

> 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.

Do you mean 'initialcc' on bugs? or ?

> 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

Why not? 

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

This is unlikely to happen, so repeating your plea isn't likely to help
any. 

kevin

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20130514/77e80e88/attachment-0001.sig>


More information about the devel mailing list