Re: Maintainer information in source packages (was: Re: Returning to the requirement that Uploaders: contain humans)
- Date: Fri, 4 Aug 2017 12:17:40 +0100
- From: Simon McVittie <smcv@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Maintainer information in source packages (was: Re: Returning to the requirement that Uploaders: contain humans)
On Fri, 04 Aug 2017 at 12:10:03 +0200, Ansgar Burchardt wrote:
> So I have been wondering several times whether we should move the
> maintainer information elsewhere. For example, tracker.d.o could be
> extended to record maintainer information. It could also understand
> the concept of "teams" listing team members and whom to send mails
> about individual packages.
I think this is an excellent idea.
This would also solve the fact that I'm still considered to be a
co-maintainer of several Telepathy packages, having removed myself from
Uploaders in team git in 2014; so is Jonny Lamb, who did the same in 2016.
But NMUing a package that I no longer use or want to maintain in order
to remove myself from Uploaders seems backwards in terms of my level of
responsibility for that package's continued operation...
(Obviously if the team or its upstream were more active, this would be
a non-issue, because there would have been an upload.)
> This would also address the fact that various bits of our
> infrastructure don't know about Uploaders (like bugs.d.o only
> contacting the Maintainer).
Right - at the moment, co-maintainers (or even primary maintainers) have
to use PTS subscriptions, unless they are subscribed to the mailing list
that is the Maintainer.
For members of larger teams who feel responsible for a minority of the
team's packages (like my role in the Games Team), subscribing to the
Maintainer mailing list is not particularly useful. Having joined the
team to maintain the Quake series, I don't want to see Doom and Nethack
bug reports :-)