Charm maintainership in metadata.yaml?
gustavo.niemeyer at canonical.com
Mon Nov 14 23:08:32 UTC 2011
>>> Likewise, there will be charms with no maintainer that will
>>> be handled much like Ubuntu packages, where the maintainer would just
>>> be charmers at ubuntu.com or something like that.
>> I think it would be good practice to have a designated person or LP team
>> associated with every charm; an overall core charmers team would have a
>> mandate to amend any core charm, but the charms should all have
>> designated maintainers rather than being in one single bucket.
> +1. In recent efforts to have better/faster initial response to bugs in
> Ubuntu packages residing in Main, we thought to use the package
> maintainer to determine which team should be first responder...until we
> noticed the *heavy* use of the generic "Ubuntu Developers" maintainer,
> with email pointing to ubuntu-devel-discuss :/.
+1. There are several advantages in having LP people or teams being
the branch owners and maintainers. We can extract those details and
inject them into the charm bundle when the store is exporting the
-- I'm not absolutely sure of anything.
More information about the Juju