Joerg Jaspert wrote: <snip> > > What this also does is getting you out of touch with your (possible) > sponsors, as now you let them upload once, advocate you, then you upload > following versions yourself. A year later you have a new package and > need to find a sponsor again, beginning from point zero. > This isn't necessarily a bad thing. Some sponsors tend to sponsor in areas that they're familiar with - maybe a certain type of package such as web or multimedia or by the language it's written in instead. If we decide to encourage this, we might have it so that each package is reviewed by someone with somewhat more specific knowledge of that package's area, or at least feels comfortable with the package rather than the packager. > > And also - how do you want to handle the case that someone might be in > uploaders field of other packages already, because he is doing lots of > work there and so co-maint, at the time of applying as "DM"? I mean, do > you ask all other package maintainers if they would be ok with them > possibly able to upload their packages now, without being a DD? > Or is this a "dont care, and if it happens lets remove their rights" > thing, waiting for a possible fuckup and acting on it then? > Personally, as a member of a team that maintains packages (Cyrus), I would hope that people are only uploaders/comaintainers if the team maintaing the package feels that they are able to release/upload, even if they don't have the right, or are at least trusted enough to not do so without consulting the team. (When I joined the team, I think I was listed as a co-maintainer rather early, but even with many DDs on the team, uploads aren't done unilaterally, there's always either an email to the list or a discussion on IM between people before releasing a package) Benjamin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature