[oe] [RFC] Removing MAINTAINER field from recipes

[Graeme Gregory]

> What is missing here is the proposed alternative. The idea we discussed
> was having a Maintainers file, similar in spirit to that in the Linux
> kernel where people can detail areas they're interested in and give some
> kind of indication of the type of support they want to give.
> 
> For example, in the case of linux-openzaurus-*, I'd consider that I
> actively maintain that, and I'd like to be consulted on changes to those
> files.
> 
This I like as a proposal. For example my listing would be the packages
that I actively maintain now plus a generic entry about audio/video.

> This removes all kinds of policy issues such as "when I copy a .bb file
> to a new version, who is the maintainer"? 
> 
That does neatly fix that problem, as long as people dont take it for an
excuse not to communicate.

> The format of the maintainers file is yet to be determined and proposals
> are welcome. So far the requirements are something simple and consistent
> in an easily parsed format (both human and computer parsed). We need to
> list a contact, the packages covered and the level of interactivity of
> the maintainer (we need a list of these levels?).
> 
> 
> By creating this new file, we get the overhaul of the MAINTAINERS we
> need and it solves a lot of existing policy issues which we can't solve
> with the existing structure so personally, I'm very much in favour of
> it.
> 
I second this proposal, it covers the issues I raised with my earlier
email and gives still a point of contact which I like.

Graeme