Roozbeh Pournader schrieb: > On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 17:59 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> === Disputes === >> [...] > > I don't know what is it, but this part makes me worry to some degree. It > looks like too much bureaucracy, The first para ended with: "There are no hard rules how maintainers should solve those disagreements. But in practice it should be something like this:". In other words: those were only suggestions. I'll clarify the wording a bit to make that more clear. > [...] > I also tend to think that the suggested mechanism will push us toward a > democracy to some degree instead of a meritocracy. I guess I should bite > the bullet and say it: The bureaucracy looks too much like Debian to me. I don't want to much bureaucracy, but some is needed. If you have special points you'd like to see improved/changed in the proposal please be more specific, send me a diff (preferred), or write a proposal please. > I quite like other parts of the proposal, and the only other part that > makes me worry a little is the three-maintainers-per-package part. I > can't say much about other packages, with the kind of packages that I > am/was involved in maintaining, two is usually quite enough. Three or > more maintainers will only make things more complicated. I think three it the best middle ground. CU thl -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
