Am 19.03.2006 um 23:10 schrieb Trevor Harmon:
On Mar 19, 2006, at 1:04 PM, Benjamin Reed wrote:
[...]
It makes
sense to, by default, defer to the person who understands that
software
well enough to package it, when questions arise.
But this can still be the default in the model I propose. And as
you said in your response to Max, sometimes changes are so trivial
that there's no need to defer to the original maintainer.
That's debatable. Sometimes you *think* the change is trivial,
precisely because you are not intimately aware of all the subtle
aspects of a given package.
Anyway, to me "maintainership" for Fink packages was always very
close to that in Debian: It's not all "for life", but rather, the
maintainer is the single person who feel responsible for taking care
of a given package. He coordinates all changes made to the package.
He's the "expert" for it. And if he lacks time or interest, he hands
over this position to another maintainer. If other people discover
bugs or problems in the package, they report them to the maintainer,
possibly including a patch/fix, which the maintainer reviews and
incorporates into the package.
-> that's what my understanding of the role of a maintainer was so
far, and I think it's rather close to what Debian does, though I am
not really sure if that claim is true :-).
Cheers,
Max
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by xPML, a groundbreaking scripting language
that extends applications into web and mobile media. Attend the live webcast
and join the prime developer group breaking into this new coding territory!
http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=110944&bid=241720&dat=121642
_______________________________________________
Fink-devel mailing list
Fink-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-devel
