Re: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers

[Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>]

Rhonda D'Vine writes ("Re: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers"):
>  Going towards an abolished maintainership
> area it will make it even less likely such needed communication with the
> people feeling emotionally attached to the package to happen.

This is a very good way of explaining the social reasons for retaining
something like maintainership.

>  It's already at the lower and every now and then that it hurts,

I think if one is very stubborn, and doesn't mind undoing other
people's work, etc., then maintainership is very strong.  If one cares
about doing what much the rest of the project says it wants,
maintainership is often quite weak.

This is not really a good combination.

Ideally maintainership would be strong for the maintainer who doesn't
like to argue much and who is easy to convince of true things, but
weak when used by a stubborn maintainer or one who communicates
poorly.

I have not much of an idea how to do that, but making _sole_
maintainership weaker is perhaps going in that direction.

Ian.

-- 
Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk>   These opinions are my own.

If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is
a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.