Figure out `maintainer` vs. `contact` in debcraft.yaml fields
Metadata
Current evaluation
Open design question on whether debcraft.yaml's required maintainer field overlaps with the generic craft contact field, and how contact should map into the built artifact. No labels, comments, or maintainer response in 285 days; code still has a TODO comment (contact -> Maintainer) in project.py.
Suggested action: needs triage
Reason: The issue is an unlabelled, unassigned design question with zero comments and no maintainer acknowledgement in 285 days, so it has not been triaged. It is still relevant: debcraft/models/project.py retains the comment '# contact -> Maintainer' and the schema still defines a separate contact field, so the question remains unresolved. Not stale-closable because the underlying ambiguity persists in current code.
Issue body
Evaluation history
| Date | Model | Scores | Action | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| qwen/qwen3.8-27b |
Impact:
35
Quick Win:
15.75
Staleness:
75
Complexity:
55
Confidence:
70
Support Request:
0
|
needs triage | Open design question on whether debcraft.yaml's required maintainer field overlaps with the generic craft contact field, and how contact should map into the built artifact. No labels, comments, or maintainer response in 285 days; code still has a TODO comment (contact -> Maintainer) in project.py. | |
| qwen/qwen3.6-35b-a3b |
Staleness:
85
Complexity:
40
Confidence:
85
Support Request:
10
|
needs triage | Decision needed on whether maintainer and contact fields in debcraft.yaml are duplicative or serve different purposes, and how to map them to the resulting artifact. Currently untriaged and inactive for 244 days. | |
| qwen3.6-35b-a3b-mtp-q6 |
Staleness:
70
Complexity:
20
Confidence:
75
Support Request:
5
|
needs triage | Decision needed on whether debcraft.yaml should use maintainer or contact fields, or both, to align with generic craft project conventions. Currently unlabelled and inactive. | |
| qwen3.6-35b-a3b-mtp-q6 |
Staleness:
70
Complexity:
20
Confidence:
90
Support Request:
0
|
needs triage | Determines if debcraft.yaml maintainer and craft contact fields are duplicative or distinct. Requires a decision on field mapping and artifact inclusion. Open 209 days, zero comments, awaiting triage and assignment. |
Update history
No update history recorded yet.
Related work
-
Related To:
debcraft#39
(confidence 60%)
Issue #39 (Validate maintainer names) is referenced in project.py next to the maintainer field and touches the same debcraft.yaml maintainer field, though it addresses validation rather than the contact/maintainer distinction.
Related issues
| Issue | Project | State | Summary | Similarity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #39 Validate maintainer names | debcraft | open | Feature request to validate the maintainer, original-maintainer, and uploaders fields as RFC822 Name <email> format in debcraft. Open 285 days with no labels, comments, or activity; no evidence of a fix or related work. |