On Mon, 2008-08-11 at 19:36 +1000, Andrew Bartlett wrote: > On Mon, 2008-08-11 at 10:30 +0200, Rex Dieter wrote: > > Andrew Bartlett wrote: > > > > >> It's policy; see: > > >> > > >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Policy#What_to_do_if_a_Maintainer_is_absent > > > > > > This is one of the policies that makes me reluctant to become a Fedora > > > contributor. > > > > How so? > > I really am going to try to make a good stab at maintaining the packages > I'm proposing for Fedora, but as I won't list my 'Vacations' in public, > and I like the idea of tech-free holidays (and at other times, simply > get busy), it certainly could come up. > > Hopefully the OpenChange/Samba4 stack attracts the interests of > co-maintainers, so this isn't a problem. Right, having one or more co-maintainers makes this a non-issue. Even during busy times, simply moving a bug to ASSIGNED is a response, since it means you've triaged it yourself and at least agree it's actionable at some future point. If you haven't already started a separate thread to locate potential comaintainers for the OpenChange/Samba4 stack, you certainly can do that here. :-) -- Paul W. Frields gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://paul.frields.org/ - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
