[Development] Maintainership of QtNetwork

Knoll Lars Lars.Knoll at digia.com
Mon Nov 4 19:21:38 CET 2013

On 04/11/13 17:25, "Koehne Kai" <Kai.Koehne at digia.com> wrote:

>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia.com at qt-project.org
>> [mailto:development-bounces+kai.koehne=digia.com at qt-project.org] On
>> Behalf Of Richard Moore
>> Sent: Monday, November 04, 2013 1:32 PM
>> To: development at qt-project.org
>> Subject: [Development] Maintainership of QtNetwork
>> Hi All,
>> As some of you may know, Shane has a new job and therefore has a lot
>> time to spend on QtNetwork. He, Peter and I have discussed how we should
>> maintain the module in the future. What we're proposing is that Peter
>>and I
>> take over as joint maintainers since neither of us has the time to keep
>>on top
>> of things alone. Anyone looking to help out in this area should feel
>>free to
>> drop us a mail.
>This isn't a veto or anything, but having two 'equal' maintainers for the
>same area sounds odd to me. I mean, it's perfectly fine that you split up
>the workload, but the point of having a nominal maintainer is to have
>_one_ person to go to, and _one_ person who can decide if there's need
>... It doesn't mean that the maintainer can't delegate his work though,
>up to the point that whomever he trusts can act as a de-facto decision
>maker, too.
>Anyway, it's of course great that you two stepped up ;) Also thanks to
>Shane for taking responsibility for this important module so far.

Also a big thank you Shane from my side.

I¹m also happy that Peter and Rich are stepping up to take over the
maintainership. A shared maintainership is something we didn¹t have
before, but I¹m happy to try it out. IMO it¹ll work fine, as long as Peter
and Rich agree between themselves.


More information about the Development mailing list