Re: Automake maintenance (was: Re: [PATCH v3] new option: object-shortname)

Am 03.01.2017 um 21:24 schrieb Stefano Lattarini:
>
>> On the other hand, any maintainer is better than no maintainer.
>>
> Absolutely! Even just having someone operating in maintenance mode
> would be far better than the current status, in which even the most basic
> patches, typofixes and bug reports get ignored.
>
>> Since my dayjob depends on Automake I could probably devote some
>> small but fixed amount of time to Automake maintenance.
>>
>> Best regards.
>>
>
> Thank you for your interest and patience.
>
> Cheers,
>     Stefano
>

Okay. So I'm wondering about two more things:

1) What implications does it have to be a maintainer of a GNU package. 
I'm not otherwise connected to GNU. I have completed the copyright 
paperwork for this patch. What other implications or requirements are there?

2) How do you make releases? (preparations in git, where/how to upload 
the tarball, signing the tarball)

If you think I'm qualified I can try become the maintainer, but please 
don't expect lots of new features any time, since I'd be operating 
mostly in bare maintenance mode (and I haven't seen the majority of the 
code base yet).

Best regards.