Paul Wise writes ("Re: Replace the TC power to depose maintainers"): > I'd like to reframe this discussion a little bit... > > What exactly is the Maintainer* field for? > > Initially it was a way for individuals to declare their commitment to > perform all tasks in relation to a package.
Not at all. Mainly, it was a way to control who got email about the package. > * and why did we make the huge mistake of not calling it Maintainers I was there at the time; this may even have been my fault. Sorry. > and then making the secondary mistake of introducing Uploaders instead > of renaming it to Maintainers. That was madness. We should have just fixed the things that wanted a single email address for that field. We could still do this. "Team maintained" packages would end up with Maintainer: Alice, Bob, Cryptographic Tales Team > I would like to see Maintainer/Uploaders replaced with some sort of > fine-grained commitment registration system: > > I commit to [stuff] Oh god please no. I wouldn't ever want to make any such statement. Ian. -- Ian Jackson <ijack...@chiark.greenend.org.uk> These opinions are my own. If I emailed you from an address @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.