Charns with Multiple Maintainers

[Marco Ceppi]

I would rather it be a string or a list so we don't have to convert all of
the charms metadata.yaml to lists.

so both of these would still be valid going forward:


maintainer: Jon Doe <jon at example.com>

and

maintainer:
    - Jon Doe <jon at example.com>
    - Steve Doe <steve at example.com>

However, this brings up a bigger issue. Should maintainer be renamed to
maintainers to match the rest of the potentially plural options? Otherwise,
+1 to having a list of maintainers.

Thanks,
Marco Ceppi


On Mon, Mar 3, 2014 at 9:40 AM, Joshua Strobl <truthfromlies at gmail.com>wrote:

> I am all for this as it is more relevant to larger teams that may have
> multiple individuals involved in the development and maintaining of a
> charm and it doesn't have any effects on instances where a single
> maintainer is listed.
>
> On 03/03/2014 04:26 PM, Charles Butler wrote:
> > Greetings everyone,
> >
> > It occurs to me that having a single maintainer of a charm while
> > functional, doesn't offer the best route moving forward for a charms
> > longevity. I would like to propose a format change to the authorship line
> > of charms allowing for more than a single entity to maintain the charm.
> >
> > My initial thought would be to convert the entry in metadata.yaml from a
> > string type to a list type
> >
> > maintainer:
> >     - Jon Doe <jon at example.com>
> >     - Steve Doe <steve at example.com>
> >
> > This seems like it would have larger rippling effects in surrounding
> > projects - charmworldlib and juju-gui come to mind.
> >
> > What do you guys think? Would the above spec work to accomplish the goal?
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Juju mailing list
> Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju/attachments/20140303/f5c3b3f3/attachment.html>