| 1 |
On Sat, 2019-08-03 at 06:40 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
| 2 |
> > > > > > On Fri, 02 Aug 2019, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Add two new maintainer types: 'proxied' for proxied maintainers, |
| 4 |
> > and 'watcher' for people who wish to be CC-ed on bugs but are not |
| 5 |
> > maintainers (e.g. upstream developers). |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Upstream developers can be listed already now in the <upstream> |
| 8 |
> description (per GLEP 68). Should they be listed twice now, only to |
| 9 |
> indicate that they are to be CCed on bugs? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
This is happening already. I'm not saying it's perfect but I don't see |
| 12 |
anyone working on a better solution either. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
And yes, I'm talking about real life situation when the only |
| 15 |
<maintainer/> in the package left was this 'upstream watcher'. |
| 16 |
I suppose an alternative solution there would be to return to explicit |
| 17 |
logical marking as <maintainer-needed/>. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> On the other hand, random non-upstream people that don't have any |
| 20 |
> defined function related to the package aren't maintainers. So they |
| 21 |
> don't belong in metadata at all, IMHO. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
I agree. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Best regards, |
| 28 |
Michał Górny |
Archives