Re: Making better use of multiple maintainers

[Martin Michlmayr <tbm@cyrius.com>]

* Marcelo E. Magallon <mmagallo@debian.org> [20010902 21:26]:
>  * wmaker.  It's not a complex package, but it operates under
>  several
> 
>  * celestia.  Simple.  Very limited scope.  Not many configuration
>  options.
> 
> Would I like to find a co-maintainer for wmaker?  Yes.  Celestia?
> No.  My criteria for considering co-maintainership is simple: "Can I
> cover all the possible ways of using this package myself?"

I agree with you that it is more important in the case of wmaker where
more than one developer can work on the package without much
communication.  However, I'm not sure I agree that a backup is totally
useless in the case of celestia.  What happens if you're on vacation,
woody is released tomorrow and a RC bug is filed on celestia today and
noone cares to upload a fixed package?  Similarly, if you were really
busy for a while, your backup could do uploads so the users don't have
to wait for bug fixes too long.

What I'm trying to say is that a backup makes sense in virtually all
cases, even in the case of smaller packages.  Bigger packages certainly
benefit to a higher degree, but I think it makes sense for smaller
packages, too.

-- 
Martin Michlmayr
tbm@cyrius.com