On Fri, 2008-05-09 at 14:03 -0400, Andrew Overholt wrote: > * Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> [2008-05-09 13:53]: > > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 11:30 AM, Colin Walters <walters@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > What would you guys think about having a subset of Java packages be > > > owned by a Java group? > > Tom Fitzsimmons was going to start a Java SIG. Perhaps this can tie in > with that? Yeah, that makes sense. > > > [...] > > > > I think that would help with coverage of issues. The main problem is > > making sure that someone is taking ownership of a problem in the group > > so that something does not just get 'oh I thought Colin was working on > > it?' > > Yeah, that's my only issue as well. And it annoys me when I file a bug > and see it go to xdg-maint@xxxxxxxxxx or something since there's no > guarantee anyone's watching that alias. That is a valid concern - however, since Fedora is in general a community project, there's no guarantee that a bug will get a response even if it's assigned to an actual person. As for knowing that someone's working on a bug - Bugzilla provides a mechanism for someone to take ownership of a bug (change state to ASSIGNED, reassign to your email address). I think in practice, having more people see issues and work on them collectively will work out better than individual fiefdoms. -- fedora-devel-java-list mailing list fedora-devel-java-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-java-list
