On Thu, May 8, 2008 at 6:55 AM, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Yes, perhaps. Or maybe it would be better to have a code-monkey sign up > as co-maintainer for the package, where the primary maintainer isn't > capable of actually..., well, maintaining the package. Generally, I would agree that the maintainer needs to be able to diagnose breakage in the dominant language of the package in question. Hence why I don't touch mono or java packages. But, there are times when an application might provide mixed language or toolkit bindings which are harder to adequately account for based on accumulated personal experience. And we certainly can't expect everyone to have direct experience nor access to both big and little endian arches. And well, it'd be sort of nice to know how our contributor skillset breaks down, from a project resources point of view. -jef"Though in just a couple more years, we could probably expect everyone to have access to some sort of 64bit arch"spaleta -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
