Package Review Stats for the week ending January 18th, 2009

[Toshio Kuratomi]

Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> Behdad Esfahbod wrote:
> 
>>
>> I'm not actively seeking giving away my packages.  I'm fine with them
>> as long
>> as they don't demand too much time from me.  But I'll just hand them
>> off as
>> soon as a Fedora contributor shows up and wants to make non-trivial
>> changes in
>> them.  That's for example how I handed some of my font packages to
>> Nicolas, or
>> my entire ogg vorbis stack to Hans.  The point being: I am no the
>> bottleneck /
>> problem / ... with these packages.
> 
> One of the rule of thumb was that if you are going to be maintaining the
> package in RHEL, it is better for you to be involved in the Fedora side
> as well for continuity. Otherwise, you would end up inheriting a bunch
> of spec files (and patches) without a complete understanding on the
> history behind them which makes it difficult to work on them, later on.
> Something to consider.
> 
....although this can lend itself to a comaintainer role as easily as
ownership.  (Not disagreeing, just adding a clarification).

-Toshio

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20090129/ffd67144/attachment.sig>