On 09/26/2012 10:37 AM, Kamil Paral wrote:
I personally split maintainers in the distribution into three
categories.
1. Packager
2, Maintainer
3. Upstream maintainer
Nice categorization.
We differ in the view of Packagers. You consider them harmful, I consider them desired. I am missing *lots* of packages in Fedora when compared to Debian. I would rather have lots of extra packages, some of them broken, than no extra packages. I think you overstate the importance of "Maintainer" class. Lots of packages maintained by a "Packager" will work just fine, just a fraction of them will be broken (and surely some users will appear to provide patches).
Oh it's more then just a fraction and yes I prefer few but well
maintained packages over many unmaintained packages.
If the Packager disappears from Fedora and the project is orphaned, that's completely OK too. Having the package for a year or two is better than not having it at all.
I disagree continuing to ship orphaned or maintained packages in the
distribution does more harm then good
This does not involve core system packages, they usually have multiple Maintainers around, or even Upstream maintainers. And for all the small projects there are out there on the Internets, Packager class person is just fine, and much better than no person at all.
If that individual is active most certainly if inactive it just the same
--
test mailing list
test@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe:
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/test
