Said policy is very old,
it was languishing in wiki for a very long time,
until it was imported to FESCo Docs as part of Package Maintainer Docs
wiki import.
The content was not verified at that time.
It turns out that the content was seriouly out of date,
with large parts of the policy not being applicable at all today.
This is a comprehensive rewrite of the policy.
There is no intent of making any changes,
yet much needs to be rewritten to make it applicable in current
environment.
* Adopt more formal style
* Remove references to a system where different release branches have
different maintainers.
Such system is not in use today.
* Remove suggestions that maintainers (or a hypothetical script) should
periodically post to mailing lists,
asking for more co-maintainers.
This does not happen in practice and such script still does not exist.
* Remove discussion regarding how maintainers should coordinate through
cvs usage.
This is not applicable at all, since cvs is not in use.
Suggesting something like this could make sense,
but it would be a completely different system that leverages Pagure
pull requests.
* Remove the requirement of specifying package's maintenance rules in a
file called 'rules'.
Not a single package does that, so the rule is a dead letter.
* Replace the general reference to "FESCo mediation" with a specific
reference to the Non-responsive Maintainer Policy
for the case where co-maintainers consider the primary maintainer
unsuitable for the position.
* Remove an unclear mention how co-maintenance can remove the packager
sponsorship process "in the future".
It has not happened, the the Package Sponsor Policy now explicitly takes
co-maintenance into account.
* Remove the rule that SIGs cannot be co-maintainers,
because in reality, they are currently allowed as co-maintainers.
Instead, say that SIGs cannot be primary maintainers.
* Remove the mention that upstream developers are better avoided as
primary maintainers.
This does not seem to be Fedora's position anymore.
* Reduce the encouraged amount of packagers per package to two.
In practice, few packages in Fedora reached the old recommendation of
at least three.
The page was categorized under "Package Maintainers" in wiki,
but actually contains policies that are decided by FESCo.
Thus, the correct location of the page
is in the FESCo documentation site.
Updating links to the wiki page to cross references
led to applying semantic line breaks to a single line paragraph
in the Provenpackager Policy page.
This led to small changes in wording, too,
because the original was slightly hard to read.
There was no intent to change the meaning.
Said policy was only found in the wiki. fesco-docs is a better home for
it, since other FESCo policies are already here.
The wiki article had quite many typos, grammatical errors and complex,
confusing sentences. Some of these issues are also fixed.
