[pacman-dev] pacman and maintainers

[Aaron Griffin]

On 10/16/07, Scott Horowitz <stonecrest at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 10/16/07, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 10/16/07, Dan McGee <dpmcgee at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > To Scott: I guess I'm missing your point here. What is wrong with
> > > contacting the last packager with any problems?
> >
> > This was going to be my point. Regardless of maintainer, whoever built
> > the last package should be responsible for the working state of it.
>
> I was making the same point that Mateusz Jędrasik made while I was
> typing my response. I didn't realize it was an automated process. Yes,
> I absolutely agree that the last uploader should be considered the
> packager, that was exactly what I was trying to get across too.
>
> It would be good if the website showed "packager" instead of, or in
> addition to, "maintainer" in the package info listing, since that is
> the person we'd be apt to contact. (To be honest, I dislike the subtle
> distinction..)

It's not subtle internally - the "maintainer" is the person marked in
our DB and our web interface. They elect to maintain it. The
"packager" is the name embedded in the package itself. Generally,
they'd be the same, BUT not all the time.