Policy proposal for compatibility packages

[Patrice Dumas]

On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 06:32:03PM -0500, Brian Pepple wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 23:53 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> > Anybody can already raise his concerns about a compat package, why more
> > procedures and such a veto power for a particular packager?
> 
> For the reasons spelled out in the proposal: 'The reasoning for the
> latter is that even if the primary maintainer is not maintaining the
> compatibility package, chances are that they will have to be involved in
> the maintenance due to passing along security problems, helping out with
> things and redirecting misfiled bugs.'

If a particular maintainer has those concerns he can raise them without
having this veto power. This makes an unneeded assymetry between a
primary maintainer and somebody who would like to do a compat package.
There is no reason why a primary maintainer would be smarter than
somebody wanting a compat package.

--
Pat