Henrique de Moraes Holschuh wrote: > On Fri, 28 Jul 2006, Clint Adams wrote: > >>> Yes, and we could start by really enforcing co-maintainership. Make it 100% >>> mandatory for all essential, required and base packages at first. >>> >> Are there packages which are particularly well co-maintained right now? >> > > Particularly well co-maintained? I don't know. Well co-maintained? Yes. > cyrus-imapd comes to mind, but that's because I follow that one very > closely. > > Gee, thanks boss. As a member of this team, I want to add a few benefits of team-maintenance that I've observed: (Unordered) - To many eyes, all bugs are trivial. Maybe not all bugs, but I know that the ability to have someone looking over your shoulder makes catching mistakes a lot easier, especially typos. - They provide good learning environments. I knew nothing about cyrus when I joined the team, and was still unsure about my (minimal) work in debian. I learned a lot about maintaining a complex package as well as various other bits of knowledge (one of the other team members taught me to use SVN as I had never touched a source code management system before). - It lowers the burden on everyone's shoulders. I can think of many times where I've seen emails like "This patch from upstream needs to go in, but I have no time, can someone else do it?" Also stuff in IRC/AIM like: "I"m heading out the door right now, I've done x and y of task foo, can you finish up with z". - It allows for more specialization. While we all work on all of the package, I tend to do more bug triage and work with the debian packaging, while others will do more work on the upstream source code. This lets people work to their talents. There are others, but the rest that come to mind at the moment are oft-repeated. I'm sure I missed some. HTH, Benjamin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature