[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Maintainer responsible for or only doing maintenance?

On 12-06-02 at 04:59pm, Paul Wise wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 1:33 AM, Jonas Smedegaard wrote:
> > Today I find the Maintainer field a joke.
> Both the Maintainer and Uploaders fields are less than useful for a
> number of reasons:
> They are tied to the source package, this is bad because people's
> commitment to and responsiblity for packages changes over time
> independent of source package uploads.
> They are not sufficient to represent reality. While we have some 
> definition in, there are many different styles of maintainership and 
> different levels of commitment.
> I would like to see Debian get rid of the Maintainer and Uploaders 
> fields and instead implement something like DEP-2 where we have a list 
> of people, what they are willing to work on and the things they are 
> willing to do.
> In this way we will get a much more realistic picture of the
> commitment of the Debian community to the software that we are
> shipping. Registering this level of detail might not be something
> individuals are willing to do though.

So because the classic fields are insufficient, you want to drop them.  
Even if you already ahead notice that  replacement is probably too 
complex for simple uses.

I have not followed DEP-2, so unaware if I am totally off here, but 
seems more sensible to me to keep classic hints as defaults.

 - Jonas

 * Jonas Smedegaard - idealist & Internet-arkitekt
 * Tlf.: +45 40843136  Website: http://dr.jones.dk/

 [x] quote me freely  [ ] ask before reusing  [ ] keep private

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply to: