Last warning don't modify my packages!!!

[Warren Togami]

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> 
> Frank Büttner schrieb:
>> Today somebody again has modify one of my maintained packages, without
>> talk about to me. This is the last warning. When some body do it again,
>> I will stop all my activity's for FC extra. When someone find an Bug
>> then open an Bugreport!!! And don't modify my packages!!!
> 
> We IIRC don't yet have any specific written rules that handle this kind
> of stuff (anyone interested in working out some rules? FESCo always
> needs help!).
> 
> The general practice is that only the maintainer changes his packages
> normally. I don't like that to much. I think we should give other
> maintainers who know their job well (read=sponsors,co-maintainers and
> well know/long term contributors) a bit more freedom to fix small or
> medium size things in other peoples packages without to much overhead
> (read=bugzilla). *Especially* if the maintainer doesn't react in time.
> 
> Sure, errors will happen and there will be some fights over details now
> and then, but I think the general quality of Extras will improve if we
> work in a *slightly* more wiki-style approach.
> 

How often do people get upset about modifying each other's packages?

It would be a BAD idea if we need ACL's to restricting people to only 
their own packages.  Especially in a volunteer driven community, we need 
the flexibility and low-overhead of being mostly open.  If we get a 
point where we need more restrictive ACL's by default, then that would 
be a sad situation.  That would mean we don't trust each other as 
maintainers.

In practice things go pretty well under the current system.  Generally 
each maintainer is expected to respect ownership of others.  In many 
cases owners give explicit or even blanket permission to others, "Sure, 
I trust you to do the right thing."  In other cases, maintainers ask for 
permission before making specific changes.

I see this particular case where there was no response to a bug report 
for a month as perfectly acceptable.  The system is not broken, although 
it could be perhaps codified in a clearer way in the Wiki if it isn't 
already.

Warren Togami
wtogami at redhat.com