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

Re: egcc maintainer



Ian Jackson wrote:
  >Oliver Elphick writes ("Re: egcc maintainer "):
  >...
  >> <debate>
  >> However, one of the group should be nominated to have the prime
  >> responsibility for the package. This maintainer's address should be
  >> listed in the Group-leader control field.  The group leader has the
  >> particular responsibility of ensuring that Debian policy is followed
  >> and is the person who will be contacted if messages to the group
  >> alias get no response.
  >> </debate>
  >
  >What is the purpose of this ?  I disagree with it.
 
The purpose is to see to it that there is an individual who is deemed
ultimately responsible.  If there is a group with no leader, there is
no-one to chase when things go wrong.  Any co-operative effort needs
co-ordination or it will fall apart.  [When things are working well, the
co-ordinator may not need to do anything, of course, but things do not
always work well.]

Why do you disagree?

-- 
Oliver Elphick                                Oliver.Elphick@lfix.co.uk
Isle of Wight                              http://www.lfix.co.uk/oliver
               PGP key from public servers; key ID 32B8FAA1
                 ========================================
     "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to 
      forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all  
      unrighteousness."          I John 1:9 



Reply to: