Re: `Every package must have exactly one maintainer'
Hi,
>>"Scott" == Scott Ellis <storm@gate.net> writes:
Scott> deity/apt
Scott> We seem to have managed well enough with the multiple
Scott> maintainer model, although I must admit that I've been the only
Scott> person doing releases, there isn't a particular reason why
Scott> someone else on the team couldn't.
This is a good case. There has been a very clear demarcation
of responsibility in Deity; You do all releases, and everything
related to Packaging is your domain and responsibility. Jason does
the coding (oh, I know, the rest of us contribute, but Jason has been
the person who integrates stuff in, like Linus and the kernel).
There are other roles in Deity that are also well defined; and that
is the reason the team has not fallen apart at the seams.
For deity, one knows who is in charge.
The same is true of the Linux Kernel development -- there is
one guy in charge. The same is true for the Gnus development
team. And the LaTeX2HTML development team. And the Angband
Development team. Even the Xemacs development (back when I was part
of it) had one or two people with well marked demarcation of
authority in charge.
The XFree86 and CVS development teams maybe exception, but I
suspect that like Deity, there is a strict division of responsibility
in those teams as well.
I think the buck needs to stop some where in a project.
manoj
--
He who hesitates is sometimes saved.
Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: