Lubos Lunak l.lunak at
Fri Jan 18 11:09:27 GMT 2008

On Friday 18 of January 2008, John Layt wrote:
> On Thursday 17 January 2008, Lubos Lunak wrote:
> >  I don't think that's enough - just picking the person with the newest
> > copyright item in the file header seems a much better bet. Many files
> > don't have anybody, some files are outdated (e.g. kconfig.cpp). If people
> > haven't kept the file up to date until now, I don't see this changing.
> The reason I didn't update it for KCalendarSystem was it didn't feel right
> to claim the status for myself.  I'm sure others feel the same, or don't
> want to step on the currently listed maintainers toes if they are still
> around (or the file has a 'big' name like Waldo on it :-).

 Waldo's big name is not going to take care of KConfig I'm afraid. The file is 
supposed to help finding people responsible for the code, not for showing 

> Do we have any guidelines, no matter how vague, of what constitutes
> maintainership, how it gets transferred for existing code, and what defines
> abandonment?  (I'm not talking some formal Debian style structure here,
> just a few rules-of-thumb to follow).

 I don't think it's different from any other maintainership. The person in the 
file should be somebody who you'll go to if there's something needed for the 
class, be it help, a fix or a decision.

Lubos Lunak
KDE developer
SUSE LINUX, s.r.o.   e-mail: l.lunak at , l.lunak at
Lihovarska 1060/12   tel: +420 284 028 972
190 00 Prague 9      fax: +420 284 028 951
Czech Republic       http//

More information about the kde-core-devel mailing list