Hi Ola,

On  Mi 30 Nov 2016 13:45:35 CET, Ola Lundqvist wrote:

> Hi Mike
>
> I do not have any real objection on this. However there is one thing
> to consider and that is whether people will feel responsible for each
> package.
>
> I have been maintaining vnc for more than 10 years now and I have seen
> that people are active for a while, but then do not feel responsible
> anymore. If the package is team maintained then nobody will notice
> that the uploader is absent and no-one will feel responsible for
> orphaning it. So it will be silently orphaned instead.
>
> This is my main concern about a larger umbrella. The really small
> umbrella of tigervnc have a similar problem already so maybe it is not
> so much of a change.
>
> Best regards
>
> // Ola
>

there could be several policies.

One could be: all team members are allowed to maintain all pkgs, like  
LowNMU on all pkg-remote packages.

Another could be: only uploaders of a package maintain it. Within the  
team of uploaders, it should be clear when people become unavailable  
or MIA.

The benefit from a team context is that if now activtiy is observed on  
one package for a while and all uploaders behave unresponsively, then  
another team member may just continue the work (or someone else with  
competence joining the team from outside). No need to undergo the  
procedure of an official MIA proposal of one maintainer.

I am basically open to any of the above approaches for tigervnc. And  
that is just my personal opinion. I am not wearing any kind of team  
leader hat for that team at the moment...

light+love
Mike
-- 

DAS-NETZWERKTEAM
mike gabriel, herweg 7, 24357 fleckeby
mobile: +49 (1520) 1976 148
landline: +49 (4354) 8390 139

GnuPG Fingerprint: 9BFB AEE8 6C0A A5FF BF22  0782 9AF4 6B30 2577 1B31
mail: mike.gabriel@das-netzwerkteam.de, http://das-netzwerkteam.de

