On Thursday 15 March 2007 21:32, dann frazier wrote: > Given this, I believe anyone on the kernel team should be permitted an > entry in the Uploaders field. I also do not believe that the presence > of a maintainer's name in the Uploaders field grants them any > additional privileges. Uploads still need to be coordinated on the > mailing list, etc. In the D-I team we treat the Uploaders field differently. Uploaders are people who actually coordinate the package or do frequent uploads because of their role in the project (e.g. the release manager). I realize that the kernel is different from D-I and that you may want to use different rules. For D-I it just does not make sense to have all D-I contributors to be uploaders for any or all components. However, I do feel that an for an uploader to be added, he/she should actually be considered to be capable of and responsible enough to actually _do_ (and thus coordinate) uploads for the package in question. In the case of the kernel that probably requires more skills than for random d-i components. In fact, uploading the kernel is probably on the same level as uploading debian-installer: there is an awful lot of coordination and checking to be done before it is safe to do so. IMHO anyone listed in uploaders should actually be trusted by the team to do uploads responsibly (including proper announcements, coordination amongst architectures and coordination with other teams. Just being a member of the kernel team or a kernel porter is probably insufficient reason to be an uploader. The uploader field IMHO is not a "status" field, but a "role" field: if you do not have the "role" of uploader, you should not be listed. Just my 2c... Cheers, FJP P.S. In this case that effectively means I understand Bastian's reversion, although I do not agree with the way in which it was done.
Attachment:
pgpHkY1NlmwEM.pgp
Description: PGP signature