Changing policy for the Maintainer field

[Marcus Better <marcus@better.se>]

Hi,

in light of discussions [1, 2] about the best way to manage Maintainer and
Uploaders fields, I suggest we introduce a minor change, with the goal of
improving quality and minimising bit rot.

The problem is, in short, that a package may go without attention because
uploaders don't feel responsible or forget about it, thinking someone else
is maintaining the package. (I can provide plenty of examples if needed.)

I suggest we adopt the same scheme used by the Perl team [1]:
  Maintainer = the main _person_ responsible for the package
  Uploaders = the team mailing list + members who actually care for the
    package (who have touched it in the past, for example).

The Maintainer has ultimate responsibility for the package, so there is
someone to blame if the package rots. :-) The rules for team uploads still
apply, with minor variations:

*If the mailing list is listed in Uploaders, it means that anyone can make
an upload (adding her own name to the Uploaders).
*If the mailing list is not listed in Uploaders, then this is not permitted
without asking the Maintainer.

The Maintainer will be responsible for keeping the list of Uploaders in
shape, removing people who are no longer active.

Finally, I suggest we apply these rules to new packages. For existing
packages, the Uploaders can decide among themselves if and when to switch
to the new style.

Please tell me what you think about it!

Marcus

[1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2007/01/msg00275.html
[2] http://lists.debian.org/debian-java/2006/10/msg00021.html