<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <meta content="text/html;charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body bgcolor="#ffffcc" text="#000000"> Reinhard Tartler wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:87ljy97164.fsf@faui44a.informatik.uni-erlangen.de" type="cite"> <pre wrap="">I'd like to ask you to grant Romain upload access for the 'emacs-snapshot' package. He has been the former emacs maintainer in debian, and now provides up-to-date builds (updated about weekly) of the current emacs trunk at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://emacs.orebokech.com/">http://emacs.orebokech.com/</a> for debian systems. He also uploads it to the ubuntu-elisp ppa at <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-elisp/+archive">http://launchpad.net/~ubuntu-elisp/+archive</a> Granting him upload access to ubuntu for this package would eliminate sync delays to intrepid. His Launchpad account is <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://edge.launchpad.net/~rfrancoise">https://edge.launchpad.net/~rfrancoise</a>, his GPG key (note he is also a DD) is associated there. </pre> </blockquote> Is Romain a MOTU or Ubuntu-Universe-Contributor? I.e. are we confident that he will know about the current state of the release cycle (frozen, merging, beta, RC etc) and act appropriately? We want to avoid the must-be-a-generalist barrier that MOTU folks face, but we should still satisfy ourselves that someone will be an effective collaborator while focusing on their specific package. In a similar vein, for example, we need to be confident that someone understands how to work with MOTU and that they won't have a maintainer lock on their package in Ubuntu in the same way that they do in Debian. I'm sure those things are all OK in this case, but am asking for the record and to establish a precedent for the consideration of these matters in cases like this. Mark </body> </html>