Re: Requiring DOAP instead of MAINTAINERS file

["Olav Vitters" <ovitters gmail com>]

[another email where I forgot to cc the mailing lists]

On Jan 18, 2008 1:36 PM, Étienne Bersac <bersace03 laposte net> wrote:
> I do fully agree with Paolo. Making project hosting more automatic and
> more consistent would be so nice. For gnome-scan, i still didn't updated
> to latest gnome.org theme nor latest gnome-scan version. I just been
> able to install-module for the first time last weeks (thanks to
> sysadmins !). library.gnome.org should also take advantage of DOAPs.

I hope to use these DOAP files to create a consistent project page for
everyone, then with a link to either the wiki or the real home page.

> I'm ok for DOAP as long as it means less work from Maintainer and more
> for "hosting system". The Gnome hosting system is quite manual compared
> to SF, Gna!/Savannah and other.

I fully agree. With other systems a maintainer is really in control
(can create their own mailing lists, add SVN accounts, etc). Within
GNOME loads of stuff is manual, cumbersome, etc. During the RoadMap
process there is the question about infrastructure, there are usually
so few suggestions on there to improve things.
Perhaps it is just because 'infrastructure' means something different
to everyone. To me it is clearly the usage of SVN, Mango, CMS, etc
(not the gtk+, lib*).

On the other hand, having d-d-l is so much nicer than having to
subscribe to 100+ devel mailing lists. Or manually asking each
maintainer to please allow a specific SVN account to be able to commit
in their module.

Regards,
Olav