enforce co-maintainers (was: Re: next FESCo meeting agenda.)

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 15:53 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> seth vidal schrieb:
> >>> You also have the problem of folks being on holiday. It's not unusual in
> >>> the UK for people to vanish for 2 - 3 weeks.
> >> So what? While on vacation, one of your packages may need the attention.
> >> It's best to have co-maintainers.
> > +1 for co-maintainers.
> 
> Well, should we try to enforce co-maintainers in the longer term?
Enforce? ... encourage, yes.

>  E.g. a
> rule "each package must have at least one primary maintainer and one
> co-maintainer"?
I am strongly opposed to this. It would be counterproductive.

What we need is teams, dealing with certain tasks (e.g. systematic
packaging bugs, x86_64 portability issues, security), not "multiple
owners", fighting for details.

Ralf