On 18/03/07 at 20:49 +0000, Mark Shuttleworth wrote: > > 1.) upstream packagers should start with a mentor. The mentor will > > take full responsibility for the packages during the whole process. > > Yes, agreed, and we could record this formally so everyone can so who > in MOTU is responsible.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean here (parse error around "can so who in MOTU" ?) > > a) after the initial upload rights have timed out, they can not be renewed, > > because upstream should by that time have become a full-fledged MOTU. What if that person is not interested at all in becoming a MOTU ? Being a MOTU should imply that you are technically able to understand and work on all packages in universe. If that person has only worked on a few packages, he/she is not going to achieve that. > I think this is a good start! It's important that this be codified as a > standard policy, for all upstreams. "for all upstreams" raises two points: - do we really want this for all upstreams ? Upstream usually have very different agendas regarding releases, and they might not understand that uploading a new, not-so-well-tested version late in the release cycle is not really a good idea. - why limit this to upstream developers ? People who regularly get sponsored through REVU should really be able to benefit from that as well. Note that there's a similar discussion on debian-project@ currently, about the introduction of the "Debian Maintainer" status, allowing non-developers to upload packages for which they are listed as Maintainers. The thread begins at http://lists.debian.org/debian-project/2007/03/msg00074.html -- | Lucas Nussbaum | [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lucas-nussbaum.net/ | | jabber: [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG: 1024D/023B3F4F | -- Ubuntu-motu mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-motu
