Core and Extras maintainers coordination

[Nathan Grennan]

On Fri, 2005-07-22 at 18:15 -0400, Paul Nasrat wrote:
> Speaking with my RPM hat on - this is not going to happen unless it goes
> in upstream.  The appropriate place for that is rpm-devel-list.
> 
> I don't think it's a good idea, say you have a fairly stable package in
> FC or FE N, maintainer changes on development tree.  Between FC N and FC
> N+1 the maintainer retires from project, a new maintainer steps in.  
> 
> Having a maintainer tag be useful would mean a rebuild for no other
> reason than updating it as people expect to use it to find out who to
> talk to. We'd still need to maintain the bugzilla list for the previous
> fedora releases.
> 
> This could be implemented with a header extension and some form of
> lookaside, to keep it upto date - but look at how well specspo is kept
> fresh, it just gets out of sync from reality.
> 
> What we could do is implement a very simple xml-rpc tool to talk to
> bugzilla to query maintainer for a package - bug I'd consider adding a
> tag is the wrong thing to do here.  That really shouldn't be too hard.


  A xml-rpc tool seems reasonable. Though it has the problem of being a
new thing that people have to learn about, instead a long known thing.

  Actually, a simpler way to deal with the tag issue I bring up would be
to just use the Provider tag that already exists. It's current use of
Packager    : Red Hat, Inc. <http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla>
seems pretty worthless. If it was replaced with the maintainer, it would
just work.