On Wed, 07 Jul 2010 01:53:29 +0200, Kevin wrote: > Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > If some provenpackager want's to maintain it, why don't they take > > ownership? > > Because I can fix the occasional broken dependency, [...] ... which hopefully will not be a problem anymore with a revised push process. You could not limit your activity to Rawhide, and you would not learn about broken deps and required rebuilds for released dists, if you're not willing to become one of the package's maintainers. > [...] but I can't commit to > actually maintain hundreds of packages. For example, the bugmail would flood > me, I couldn't fix any of those bugs anyway, only the complete showstoppers > (i.e. broken deps and MAYBE (!) FTBFS). So, you won't forward problem reports to upstream either (as by now everyone knows anyway that you'd like crash reports to flood upstream directly instead of Fedora's tracker), you won't keep an eye on upstream development (e.g. commit diffs and release monitoring), and you won't learn if your recent rebuild or upgrade causes segfaults. In other words, you request to become a package-monkey with no responsibilities, who may play with a pile of packages, which is free for everyone to either mess with or leave it aside. This might work with some software, which is rather maintenance-free and has upstream developers who make quality releases, but packages for such software often are easy to maintain and are low-hanging fruit even for RPM packging beginners. If the software is used at all by anyone within the Fedora community, it should not be a big problem to find _at least_ one packager for it. And if there are more than one, increase the freedom and encourage even additional people to become one of the package's maintainers. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
