RE: Proposal: a more general and flexible appoach of packages.
On Fri, 11 Dec 1998, Darren Benham wrote:
> OOps... took out the wrong addresses in the CC field...
> When maintainer's change, who's going to change the subscription list?
In case The Maintainer of a package changes identity, the "maintainers
maintainer" would. With a single change, all mappings via the package
will then end up with the right person from that moment on. There should
also be a "maintainers" meta package that one can file bugs against. This
way, we can use the existing BTS infrastructure to provide a
> The physical maintainer's via a "(un)subscribe" message? That would
> still leave things in the hands of a physical maintainer... Automaticly
> from a package upload would still be suseptable to outdated packages...
I agree with your implication that these are all No Good.
> A volunteer?
Yes. Strictly speaking, I would say that keeping a list of all
maintainers would in principle be the Project Secretary's responsibility.
But there is of course nothing against the Secretary delegating the
practical work involved. The Project Secretary might want to stay
informed and subscribe to email@example.com. The same for
the new-maintainer people (or possibly the other way around.)
If I get my way, I'll volunteer for the maintainers maintainer work ;-)