On 06.07.2015 15:20, Robert Schweikert wrote:
On 07/06/2015 08:44 AM, Stephan Kulow wrote:
On 06.07.2015 14:27, Robert Schweikert wrote:
With the change in model I think that is a reasonable approach. As a maintainer I would complain if I automatically would get signed up to follow the Leap model. This is a situation where asking is definitely very important, IMHO. Well, you weren't asked if it's ok if the Evergreen team prolonged the maintenance time.
Correct, I also didn't commit to maintain my packages in Evergreen. I think the expectations for Leap are different. In our "based on :Factory" model the following was implied:
- commit to :Factory - be part of the distro called openSUSE <VERSION> - maintain the package in openSUSE <VERSION> for N+2 + 2 months ~ on the 8 month release cycle we started out with that turned out to be 18 months
With Leap the maintenance period is proposed to get significantly longer and it is, at least that is my understanding, expected that those that submit packages to Leap do that maintenance. For Evergreen I would say that the general expectation has always been that the Evergreen team does the maintenance for everything after the 18 months are up. Not that I think any maintainer would have refused to help if the Evergreen team came knocking on the door, but generally I would
We have to set the expectations right. So it has to be documented what parts of the distribution will be maintained for how long. Not sure how this would look like. Greetings, Stephan -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org