Co-maintainers to assist upstreams with their packages in Extras

[Rick L Vinyard Jr]

Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 03:16:51PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
>   
>> -----
>> PD> After some thinking and looking at some packages, I came to the
>> PD> conclusion that having upstream as primary maintainer in fedora
>> PD> should be avoided if possible.
>> -----
>>
>> I object to this as a general rule.  Not only is there no way to
>> enforce this except by agreement, but it is simply not possible to
>> reasonably make that generalization and I also find it to take a
>> rather dim view of the potentially enormous contributions which could
>> be made by upstream developers if we could only get them interested.
>>     
>
> Ok, my statement was a bit too much. To state it in a more sensible 
> manner, the extras community should really make sure that the upstream 
> maintainers maintaining their package in fedora extras do it in a manner 
> suitable for fedora and not with upstream objectives.
>
>   
Call me naive, but I still don't see why you're assuming that upstream 
maintainers have objectives that are, in general, at odds with the 
Fedora project.