[csw-maintainers] ARCH=all packages

[Trygve Laugstøl]

Dagobert Michelsen wrote:
> Hi Trygve,
> 
> Am 12.11.2008 um 14:10 schrieb Trygve Laugstøl:
>> As a group of volunteers you really don't have the right to tell  
>> people
>> what they should work on. Peter and everyone else has their own  
>> right to
>> work on what they feel like. So do you, and if you feel that the
>> packages you mention should be updated, you should feel free to do so.
> 
> Of course you are free to work on the projects you like. However,
> when you release a package, you have the responsibility to
> update it regularly and fix bugs as they are reported. Having
> major bugs open for a year or more is simply unacceptable.
> I am working on a webpage to make this more transparent
> and to make sure that critical bugs are cared for. The tool is
> not ready yet, but I'll hope to publish something useful
> before Zurich so we know where we stand.

Well, this is something that we have to talk about in Zurich. I really 
can't be expected to update my packages within a certain number of days 
after a new release/bug/whatever. It is not that I'm going to do it if I 
have the time, but I don't want to be know as a "bad" maintainer if I don't.

I really don't like the fact that we talk about "mine" and "your" 
packages all the time, they are *our* packages! Having a primary 
maintainer is probably wise (though it could also be a set of primary 
maintainers) as those are most likely to know how to fix bugs. If a 
primary maintainer fails to update the package within reasonable time, I 
would *hope* that someone can pick up the pieces and publish it.

To help supporting a process like that I hope that we can focus on 
re-producible builds and a better validation framework with Hudson.

--
Trygve