Co-maintainersip policy for Fedora Packages

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Roozbeh Pournader schrieb:
> On Sat, 2007-01-20 at 17:59 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> === Disputes ===
>> [...]
> 
> I don't know what is it, but this part makes me worry to some degree. It
> looks like too much bureaucracy,

The first para ended with: "There are no hard rules how maintainers
should solve those disagreements. But in practice it should be something
like this:". In other words: those were only suggestions. I'll clarify
the wording a bit to make that more clear.

> [...]
> I also tend to think that the suggested mechanism will push us toward a
> democracy to some degree instead of a meritocracy. I guess I should bite
> the bullet and say it: The bureaucracy looks too much like Debian to me.

I don't want to much bureaucracy, but some is needed. If you have
special points you'd like to see improved/changed in the proposal please
be more specific, send me a diff (preferred), or write a proposal please.

> I quite like other parts of the proposal, and the only other part that
> makes me worry a little is the three-maintainers-per-package part. I
> can't say much about other packages, with the kind of packages that I
> am/was involved in maintaining, two is usually quite enough. Three or
> more maintainers will only make things more complicated.

I think three it the best middle ground.

CU
thl