On 11/22/2011 05:59 PM, Miloslav Trmač wrote:
2011/11/22 "Jóhann B.
Guðmundsson"<johannbg(a)gmail.com>:
> What do people see as pros and cons continuing to use the current
> package ownership model?
>
> Would it be practical to dropping it altogether which in essence would
> make every contributor an "proven packager"?
Allowing any packager to commit to most packages is something that we
could try. There is a risk of people making undesirable changes, but
we won't know until we try. Also, the definition of "undesirable"
often depends on some project-specific knowledge that is not
documented anywhere, and having the access more open would be an
incentive to get this documented.
I wouldn't want to get rid of the ownership model altogether, I think
there should be a specific person responsible for handling bug
reports/RFEs. When a group is responsible to handle something not
really pleasant to do, often no single member of that group feels
personally responsible.
With that move as in either to SIG or Group model I would think they
would have to have set of representitives as in head's of the group/SIG
which would be set of individual responsible for overseeing the group
activity and at the same time be responsible for all the packages that
group/SIG maintains.
JBG