sponsorship for package adoption without package submission (was Re: Claiming ownership for thinkpad related packages and pam_mount)

[Callum Lerwick]

On Tue, 2006-05-16 at 19:51 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Yeah, we might have grown so far that we need to limit access in CVS a
> bit more. We probably need to "add layers of control and management and
> procedures" to make everything more safe.

Err, careful. Personally I'd like to encourage more collective ownership
in Extras. Locking things off would put a damper on this.

What really needs to happen is simply make it impossible to bypass the
commit emails.

(Though something more along the lines of "Package Stewardship" seems
more appropriate)
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?CodeStewardship
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/attachments/20060516/5919a3dd/attachment.sig>