[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Guylhem Aznar wrote:
> While I think we should show hits, peer review status, version, author
> (...) we mustn't declare a document unmaintained unless the author
> decides it is.
I think it's important to understand that there are two very very
different issues here.
- An authors obligation (or lack of it) to update a document they have
- Who is the maintainer of a document
I don't think the two should ever be confused.
A reasonable _assumption_ to make is that an author will maintain, at
least for a while, a document they have contributed.
I personally think the bets thing to do is simply ask. When a new
document is submitted a simple "Do you with to be listed as the
maintainer of this document?" should suffice. If the answer is "no"
(unlikely in my opinion, but it's easy to provide the flexibility to
allow it) then the document is automatically added to the 'unmaintained'
documents list, and the LDP seeks a maintainer for it.
Documents that have not been updated in some should be candidates for an
'unmaintained' documents list. "Some time" can be any period really.
3,6,12 months are probably good targets. An attempt to contact the
author at the address listed in the document should be made, if there is
no response the LDP can change the document status to 'unmaintained' and
recruit a new maintainer.
It shouldn't be any big deal. Any author with an interest in maintaining
their document will at least ensure that their email address is updated
appropriately and therefore be contactable.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org