On 11/22/2011 05:59 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > 2011/11/22 "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"<johannbg@xxxxxxxxx>: >> What do people see as pros and cons continuing to use the current >> package ownership model? >> >> Would it be practical to dropping it altogether which in essence would >> make every contributor an "proven packager"? > Allowing any packager to commit to most packages is something that we > could try. There is a risk of people making undesirable changes, but > we won't know until we try. Also, the definition of "undesirable" > often depends on some project-specific knowledge that is not > documented anywhere, and having the access more open would be an > incentive to get this documented. > > I wouldn't want to get rid of the ownership model altogether, I think > there should be a specific person responsible for handling bug > reports/RFEs. When a group is responsible to handle something not > really pleasant to do, often no single member of that group feels > personally responsible. With that move as in either to SIG or Group model I would think they would have to have set of representitives as in head's of the group/SIG which would be set of individual responsible for overseeing the group activity and at the same time be responsible for all the packages that group/SIG maintains. JBG -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
