[Cross-posted to debian-devel in hopes of getting this discussion out of -private; please follow up there.]
Tapio Lehtonen wrote: > What about encouraging maintainers to appoint a substitute maintainer? > This does not apply to group maintained packages and I am open to > suggestions what to call the second in charge, not necessarily > substitute maintainer. > > Appointing a substitute would not take lots of effort in > infrastucture, just a way to find who the substitute is when the > primary maintainer is temporarily unable to maintain. Easy enough, just put the substitute in the Uploaders field. I suppose someone who didn't want to go to the effort of finding a good substitute might list a random developer there without informing the other developer. But I imagine this behavior would be frowned upon :-) > The responsibilities of primary and substitute are to keep the > substitute informed of the state of the package so he/she can do the > substitute work when needed. This seems like a good compromise to me that wouldn't be overkill in the case of small packages. One can even imagine having the "substitute" be a list like [EMAIL PROTECTED] for random little applets, etc. > Nothing private in this e-mail. Nor (obviously) mine. -- Kevin B. McCarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Physics Department WWW: http://www.princeton.edu/~kmccarty/ Princeton University GPG: public key ID 4F83C751 Princeton, NJ 08544 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
