Re: Changing policy for the Maintainer field
Stefan Gybas wrote:
>> The Maintainer has ultimate responsibility for the package,
> What if this person becomes MIA?
One of the Uploaders will notice and take over the package and replace the
Maintainer, which would be an improvement over the current situation.
If nobody steps forward the package should be formally orphaned, unlike
today when it's only informally orphaned and slowly becomes a quality
problem.
> I'm listed as uploader in serveral packages and have been mostly
> inactive for about two years. I should have removed myself from all
> these packages. So if someone wants to remove me in the next uploads,
> that's fine.
Well, I'm glad you told us about it! Ideally people who retire would remove
their name from the packages in SVN, so the change would be in the next
release.
> The main problem IMHO is that most of the team members are only active
> for a (shorter or longer) period of time and then get busy with other
> things. Some return after a cople of months, others don't. Some (like
> me) still have the hope to return in the future.
I think your analysis is correct. That's why it is important to have clear
responsibility, otherwise we can more or less expect packages to get
silently orphaned.
> I think it's more dangerous if people are listed in the Maintainer:
> field and then become more and more inactive. A single maintainer might
> keep others from stepping in. To me, a group maintainer looks more like
> an invitation to participate.
Note that I still propose that we would have a group of maintainers, with
the others listed as Uploaders. Anyone could join and list themselves as
Uploaders, much like today.
Marcus
Reply to: