[oe] Package Maintenance

[Chris Larson]

I'd like to propose re-establishing MAINTAINER, set per package, to
individuals, or left as default for packages which aren't directly
maintained.

Doing this would:
- Facilitate dumping a list of unmaintained packages to give to new
users wanting to volunteer to help us, but not knowing how to
contribute.
- Return some individual responsibility to the project, giving one
person the blame for brokenness for that package, as well as giving
responsibility for pushing patches upstream to that person.  In my
opinion, a number of the recent issues in the project are due, in
part, to a lack of that individual responsibility.  Everything is
fuzzy, determined by a group, instead.
- Allow us to physically separate, in the repository, those packages
which get the most attention (are maintained) from those which get the
least (maintained by the entire team).  We could finally be *honest*
with our users about what we work on, telling them that the packages
which are maintained by the team are in need of an individual
maintainer, and get less attention, so bugs there will be fixed more
slowly, and there are no guarantees on functionality there.  I think
it'd be better to have a core set of *functional* recipes than have a
huge set of "might work, might not" recipes as things stand today.  In
my opinion, this would be more likely to give new users stability than
creating a stable branch, while making better use of our limited
manpower, rather than increasing the load drastically.

Opinions?
-- 
Chris Larson
clarson at kergoth dot com
clarson at mvista dot com
Founder - BitBake, OpenEmbedded, OpenZaurus
Maintainer - Tslib
Software Engineer
MontaVista Software, Inc.