On Fri, Apr 25, 2025 at 03:55:40PM +0200, Fabio Valentini wrote: > On Thu, Apr 24, 2025 at 12:52 AM Kevin Fenzi <ke...@scrye.com> wrote: > > > > So, some things I wonder about this process (in no particular order): > > > > If this lightweight process is easier, will not people just use it over > > the normal process? So, it will be harder to see who is completely > > unresponsive. There will be some of their packages with no one doing > > anything, and some with a co-maintainer that is doing all the work. > > ie, this process will be easier/better for particular maintainers, but > > might be less good for the distribution as a whole? > > The process we have for removal of inactive packagers probably helps with > this?
yeah, I think it does. > > Might clarify what 'added as a co-maintainer' means specifically? > > ie, added as admin I assume since thats needed to do branches, > > or did you mean collaborator or committer? > > :+1: this would be good to have clarified. > > FWIW for requesting branches, "commit" ACL is enough. I think commit probibly makes sense... you can fix things and push updates, but you can't then remove the primary maintainer or the like. kevin -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
