Re: Best scheme for teams and Maintainer/Uploaders fields ?
On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 11:58:49AM +0100, Pierre Habouzit wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 11:24:50AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 08, 2007 at 09:03:03AM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
>
> > > - it's difficult to keep track of who is caring for that package (hint:
> > > QA, MIA, ...)
> >
> > Uh? Why? Your maintainer field seems to address this issue. In our
> > scheme that's would be more a problem, but if the mailing list is
> > responsive it's enough. Think for example at the debian-release mailing
> > list: it's a list, but it's really responsive for all packages in the
> > archive. So IMO not being able to identify a single person is not
> > necessarily an indicator of unresponsiveness for a given package.
>
> What he means is that when people are listed automatically as
> Maitnainer/Uploader, the fact that the package is well maintained may
> hide that a particular DD do nothing at all, and is in fact MIA.
>
That would be avoided by removing entry on the basis of the changelog
containts. People who do not touch the package for +365 days would
be removed. I think to propose this policy for DebianGis.
--
Francesco P. Lovergine
Reply to: