* Fabio Valentini:
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 3:23 PM Florian Weimer <fweimer@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> * Fabio Valentini:
>>
>> > In the past few weeks, it has come up regularly that future
>> > "module-only" packages are orphaned (and hence will soon be retired),
>> > and nobody stepped up to fix this issue - especially for non-leaf
>> > packages. I don't think fedora as a project has a solution for this
>> > yet.
>> >
>> > I propose to create a "Stewardship" Group / SIG that will take care of
>> > such packages - either until a new main maintainer steps up, or until
>> > modularity matures enough so it won't be necessary anymore. (Or, until
>> > it dies a quiet death, which is always a possibility.) However, I
>> > think this is necessary until the situation stabilizes.
>>
>> The name sounds very confusing to me, considering that this seems to be
>> specific to modular content.
>
> That's why I'm asking for comments. I failed to come up with a better
> name, though.
>
> This Group / SIG would provide "classic" maintainership for otherwise
> semi-abandoned packages that only live on as franken-packages
> ("modules"), until the remaining shortcomings of modules are overcome,
> or until they are abandoned.
It's still not clear to me what this group is supposed to do.
Does the group produce modular or non-modular content? What would
qualify a package for maintenance by this group?
Why don't we need this in a non-module context? Why do modules require
such a group?
Thanks,
Florian
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
