[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: sponsorship for package adoption without package submission (was Re: Claiming ownership for thinkpad related packages and pam_mount)



Am Dienstag, den 16.05.2006, 09:41 +0200 schrieb Thorsten Leemhuis:
> Am Montag, den 15.05.2006, 13:14 -0500 schrieb Jason L Tibbitts III: 
> > I think the committee should take up the idea of sponsorship for
> > package adoption without package submission.
> I send the following to the FESCo-List last week (it was in a similar
> context). 
>[...]
> That would mean (a lot of) extra work for the sponsors. And that's why
> this idea probably will fail. Does anyone have a better idea?

Well, maybe a slightly different approach might be easier:

Package foo is orphaned. Bar is interested in taking it over, but he is
no Extras contributor yet. Sponsor foobar steps up and sponsors bar for
Extras cvs access (only cvs, bar gets *no* permissions to requests
builds in plague). Bar updates packages and sends foobar a note when
everything is ready. Foobar reviews the committed stuff and requests
build if everything is fine. If that worked fine for some update cycles
and some time in general bar gets fully sponsored and gets permissions
to requests builds.

Opinions? 

CU
thl
-- 
Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora leemhuis info>


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]