Dan Čermák píše v Pá 20. 11. 2020 v 10:21 +0100:
I am against such a measure, as this is very much subjective and will result in one of the following:
a) the devel project maintainer wants to encourage collaboration, so nothing really changes for them, except that they now have to read business reasons as well (and the submitter has to come up with one).
I didn’t want to change anything for them, just to make them think whether d:l:p is really the place where they want to submit their package, and whether they should submit it into OpenSUSE at all.
b) the devel project maintainer does not want to have an overloaded project, so they either would reject such a package anyway, or they make the submitter the maintainer. Also in this case, I fail to see how a business reason helps.
Well, to the best of my understanding, I am closest to being the maintainer of d:l:p, but the problem is that with over 2000 packages in the project, it is really hard to do decisions without some rules about it. Which is what we are talking about right now. And, forget the word “business”, that was unfortunate, I don’t care about money and sense, only about making the packager to think, as said above.
Imho the best solution would be: if you submit a package, then you have to maintain it. If you fail to do so, then it gets dropped. Don't add any additional (arbitrary) conditions. We already have wildly different and mostly unwritten rules for submissions to devel projects, we don't need more of that, rather less.
With the number of packages we have in d:l:p, I believe the community effort with monitoring scripts is the only way how to make at least some sense in the effort. Yes, we can effectively split whole project into little subfiefdoms and assign group of packages to each maintainer, but I think that the collective maintenance is way more powerful and more sustainable (especially considering having many volunteer packagers, who cannot be expected to be as reliable as full-time professionals due to The Real Life™ making troubles for them). Also, I want to be able to make large-scale changes without struggling in discussions with individual submaintainer. We are currently working on removal of python-nose from OpenSUSE, and whatever else may come up in future (e.g., I have my eyes set on eliminating python-mock as a third party package as well). See https://trello.com/b/WsskhdXA/opensuse-python for current TODO-list. Best, Matěj -- https://matej.ceplovi.cz/blog/, Jabber: mcepl@ceplovi.cz GPG Finger: 3C76 A027 CA45 AD70 98B5 BC1D 7920 5802 880B C9D8 Quod fuimus, estis; quod sumus, vos eritis.