[Pkg-mutt-maintainers] Maintainer/Uploaders change with 1.6.2, when was this discussed?

[Antonio Radici]

On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 01:41:07PM +0300, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
> First of, could we please not get territorial? We are all after the same
> thing, aren't we?
> 
> Second, as you found out already, I did talk about this -and all of my
> other changes- in a number of emails that you and everyone else in the
> team was Cc'ed on. I mailed itemized lists with changes and waited for
> feedback from everyone and moved ahead slowly (but steadily). I pinged a
> few of you repeatedly on #debian-devel (IRC) as well, to seek input and
> feedback and to make sure I was on the right track. Having a mailing
> list to be having these discussions in was the obvious next step, as I
> was getting a little lost on private emails, plus they aren't public nor
> archived.
> 
> I'm sorry for not explicitly waiting for your ack, however it was pretty
> clear to me that the package was team-maintained already and the lack of
> the team mailing list was just a technicality. (I still believe this to
> be the case).
> 
> What is the problem that you see with having the package be
> team-maintained exactly? (or to flip the question: what would reverting
> that commit accomplish right now?).
> 
> Also, FTR:
> $ git shortlog -sn --since "1 year ago"
>     59  Faidon Liambotis
>     27  Matteo F. Vescovi
>     14  Evgeni Golov
>      8  Antonio Radici
>      2  Christoph Berg
>      1  Andreas Metzler
>      1  James McCoy
>      1  Sebastian Ramacher
> 
> (and the nature of those changes is indicative too)

We (me and paravoid) had a lenghtly discussion on IRC about this, I do not
believe that the Maintainer field should be tied to the number of commits.

The main issue of this change for me was that I did miss it and I don't agree
with it right now; I'm in favour of having the Maintainer field pointing to a
team once in the medium term (which could be a couple of months).

As we discussed Faidon told me that he doesn't want the change to be reverted
and if I do so he wants to be removed from the Uploaders, I don't think that
this is going to work either.

My main concern with the change was that the Maintainer field was changed
without an explicit agreement from the person who was in the field in the first
place; you all know that I have never opposed or reverted any changes, at the
same time I would like my voice to be heard especially for that particular
change.

We would like to get your opinion on the matters too therefore I posted this
quick summary of our chat. As this is not a "joint statement", I only posted my
take on the chage, Faidon is welcome to amend and integrate whatever he thinks
that is missing from it.