On Wednesday 21 December 2005 12.23, Thomas Hood wrote:
> I don't think that it is ridiculous to require that every package have a
> team behind it---i.e., at least two maintainers. First, if someone can't
> find ONE other person willing to be named as a co-maintainer of a given
> package then I would seriously doubt that that package (or that person)
> is an asset to Debian.
The problem is: do you honestly want to force people who don't want to have
comaintainers on their packages to leave Debian?
Or do you want people who really don't want to have comaintainers for their
packages to put somebody in just so they are following the rules, while
they regard anything done by this comaintainer on his own like they would
regard an intrusive NMU?
Don't misunderstand me: team maintenance is great, and I think it makes
sense even for small and trivial packages. But trying to force anybody to
do anything is no productive in Debian (and we'd have to modify the
constitution for this, anyway :-)
-- vbi
--
Every religion is about absolute belief in its own superiority and the
divine right to impose its version of truth upon others.
-- Pervez Amir Ali Hoodbhoy, Prospect Magazine Feb 2002
Attachment:
pgpPwF4glXfvo.pgp
Description: PGP signature