On Thu, 01 Jul 2010 21:17:38 -0700 Jesse Keating <jkeat...@j2solutions.net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > On 7/1/10 6:18 PM, Kevin Kofler wrote: > > I think we need to get rid of the concept of ownership entirely, > > that'd also make orphaned or de-facto orphaned packages less of a > > problem. You see a problem, you fix it. Who cares whether the > > package has an active maintainer or not? > > While I agree that package "ownership" should not feel possessive, I > do strongly feel that there still should be some single person (or > team I suppose...) who is ultimately responsible for the package. A > place for bug reports, for autoqa activity, for reviewing potential > patches and changes from other people, etc... Agreed. While wandering provenpackagers or whoever can assist with sticky issues, there needs to be a group of people who manage bugs, build a relationship with upstream, follow upstream development, etc. So, while I think we should try and reduce the possessiveness of "owning" packages, we still need a group of stewards or whatever for packages. kevin
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
