On 13 oct. 05, at 06:01, Chris Muller wrote:

> One more point is I don't believe code "ownership" will ultimately  
> satisfy
> because it requires unreasonable expectations from someone (the  
> owner) and
> creates a bottleneck.  How can you rely on that?

Code ownership works for small well identified packages and committed  
developer.

>
> Say something needs to be done to an "owned" package but the owner  
> is on
> vacation.  Someone else is willing to do it or has done it  
> already.  Oops, but
> its not the right person.  Energy wasted.  The community must  
> capture the
> energy given to it, not try to draw it from specific places (people).
>
> Sorry, I'm done now, thanks for reading.
>
>