Co-maintainers to assist upstreams with their packages in Extras
pertusus at free.fr
Tue Oct 17 18:44:34 UTC 2006
On Mon, Oct 16, 2006 at 03:16:51PM -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:
> Only by agreement, though. There is no infrastructure in place to
> enforce anything like this.
Agreed. It is just what is commonly done.
> 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.
More information about the Fedora-maintainers