On Sat, 2006-10-07 at 11:37 -0400, Christopher Aillon wrote: > I'm arguing that *in all cases* there should be an attempt to find a new > owner for the package the instant it is deemed the maintainer isn't > doing their job for the package. There was none in this case because > the owner stifled that. > I see the following options: 1) Do not allow the package owner to promise to reupdate the package. They've shown they do not have time, someone else has to take responsibility. 2) Force co-maintainers -- at the juncture where it is determined that package foo has not met the deadline, open it up for comaintainers to put their name in and start the rebuild. The owner can rebuild before a comaintainer gets a chance to but they have to accept the comaintainers as part of their team. 3) Postpone the release of Fedora Core until someone steps forward to maintain the Fedora Extras package. In no case can the package go into the repository for the next FC release without a maintainer. #2 is probably the best of these three options but it is far from perfect. There is plenty of room for miscommunication and conflict. Do you have a better suggestion? -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
