On Sat, Jan 23, 2010 at 7:06 PM, Hans de Goede <j.w.r.dego...@hhs.nl> wrote: > I'm afraid the steering committee is pretty much non functional, and I'm not > sure that is going to change (yes that is a problem, volunteers ?) > > But for this specific case I think that what we need is something akin to > Debian's ftpmasters. Since the persons hosting the stuff are the ones who > are exposed to the most legal risk (I think IANAL). > > So I would like to suggest the following procedure for cases like this: > > 1) We need a list of people hosting files > (Question, do we count builders in this ?, or just public servers > serving rpmfusion "content") > (Note this step is a one time exercise, if we keep an up2date list of > this on the wiki after this) > > 2) When something like this happens, those people need to vote, if we > prefer anonymous voting, I suggest an independent third party sends > out please enter your vote mails, and collect answers. > > 3) If there are no "no votes", the package can get in, otherwise it > cannot. Yes this makes no a veto, but that seems the reasonable way > here.
I agree with you. Let's create RPM Fusion repomasters ;) Can anyone in this situation please step up? We first need to compile a wiki page with a list of repomasters and then it would be nice to have a mailing list where someone could mail these requests. BTW, what happens if no repomaster replies or if not all repomasters reply? Bye, Andrea.