[csw-maintainers] NMUs, non-maintainer uploads (was: reminder on contributing on recipes)

[Yann Rouillard]

> This has not been the case from the beginning, has it ?

>  > That is not entirely clear from the outside I think: the maintainers
> pages
> > still mentions "packages maintained by" and not "packages last uploaded
> by":
> > http://www.opencsw.org/maintainers/yann/
>
> It's an omission, we did update it on the package page, maybe we
> forgot to update it on this page.
>

So do we change the text on this page from "List of packages maintained by"
to "List of packages last uploaded by" ?

I also find it strange that packages appear in the QA page of a maintainer
if he just did a courtesy upload.


> I would
> definitely not like something to be uploaded with my name on it. If it
> is to have my name on it, I want to do it myself.
>

It seems this is the thing that bothers you, I understand your concern
(especially as the web page currently says "last uploaded by" and not
"maintained by") but I personnally don't mind as long as I was contacted
before.

BTW, This is also the way it works in Debian, it does seems to work there.
Of course the last uploader is visible in the changelog and the uploader is
supposed to have a look at the bugtracker after the NMU, but the maintainer
doesn't change.


>
>
> So I'd say there should be 2 scenarios after you contact a maintainer:
>
> - if the maintainer responds, you upload as yourself, you explain that
> you're only doing courtesy rebuilds, and the maintainer is welcome to
> come in and reupload to assign the package back to them.
>

I am rather for reverting back "last uploaded by" to "maintained by" and
doing NMU without changing the maintainer, and eventually add the last
uploader information somewhere.
But on this subject I will be a consensus guy and follow whatever the
consensus is.
In the end what is most important is that package do get updated.



> - if the maintainer doesn't respond, you reassign the package to a
> fake maintainer / mailing list, because if the maintainer is gone, the
> package is orphaned in practice.
>

I definitely agree on this one. This is the  "orphaned package" case and I
think this is the most common case currently.
So let's agree on the fake maintainer name and the mailing list !
    "Orphanage Caretaker team", "Orphaned package", ... ?
    orphanage at list.opencsw.org ?
   (hmm, I am not very inspired here).


Yann
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/maintainers/attachments/20130409/ab322b4c/attachment.html>