Tim Retout writes: > On 4 June 2010 10:45, Mats Erik Andersson <email@example.com> wrote: > > I am seeking an __active__ sponsor for this package. > > I'm afraid it seems you're stuck with me. ;) At DebConf we (the > project) shall have to discuss the sponsoring situation. I will not be attending debconf10, but here are my pointers: * the easy part: there is nothing wrong for non-DD to ask in advance if there are interested sponsor(s) of the piece of software they intend to package or adopt, especially with large and complex pieces. That would avoid wasting their time. * the hard part: DD-body should define a clear priority list of what they are most interested in (in no particular order): + fixing bugs (especially RC) in existing packages + co-maintaining new or existing packages, so that non-DD gather experience and DD are able to track their progress and eventually trust. + advocating new candidates when ready so that they share the sponsorship load (the hardest part: I'm not sure whether this is best to be implemented as a static common source of pointers or dynamically instantiated on per DD or packaging team basis) -- pub 4096R/0E4BD0AB <people.fccf.net/danchev/key pgp.mit.edu>
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.