enforce co-maintainers

[Mike McGrath]

seth vidal wrote:
> 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? E.g. a
>> rule "each package must have at least one primary maintainer and one
>> co-maintainer"?
>>
>>     
>
> That'll just make the barrier to addition higher.
>
> I'd say we don't mandate it but make sure all the bits are there for it
> to be encouraged :)
>
> -sv
>   
Why not just have a task force who's job it is to make sure that 
critical updates get applied in a timely manner.  If a bug is not 
responded to in a certain amount of time then the task force imports and 
builds the new package.  2-3 weeks is a long time for a security 
vulnerability, but it doesn't seem that long to wait for a major/minor 
release.

    -Mike