Updates co-maintainership proposal

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

On 15.02.2007 12:00, Christian Iseli wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Feb 2007 06:59:24 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> FYI, I reworked the last proposal and some FESCo members looked over it 
>> and seemed to agree with it so far, too. See
>> http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/EncourageComaintainership
>> for details. Please comment.
> "at least three maintainers" looks like an awful lot in case of simple
> packages.  I know it's hard to define "simple", but still...

Remember, that sentence starts with "should" -- there is no must there, 
so its okay if there are simple packages that have only two maintainers. 
But if there is someone else that is interested in becoming a 
co-maintainer then he should be accepted normally.

> "Maintainers should work towards getting at least one co-maintainer."
> I don't like this too much.  [...]

The reasons why I put that there -- co-maintainership is there for a 
long time already, but not much used yet, and FESCo wanted to encourage 
it more.

And, btw, you missed to quote the second part of that para:

[...]The goal is to have that process mostly automated -- e.g. let a 
script parse the owner informations and send out mail list now and then 
that contains a list of the packages that do not have enough 
co-maintainers yet.[...]

CU
thl