ChrisWeyl/SimpleCoMaintainership

So, there's a good proposal for co-maintainership at  Extras/Schedule/Comaintainership. This proposal depends on a number of future items, e.g., a new VCS to replace CVS, finer-grained ACLs (see prior item), a package database, etc, etc. However, there is a very real need to be able to define co-maintainers now.


 * This is just a stopgap proposal. It should, hopefully, translate eaaily (and in an automatable fashion) into the final process.
 * Co-maintainers should already be members of cvsextras. This proposal does not bypass the current "get sponsored" process.
 * Co-maintainers could be SIGs.
 * Co-maintainers will not be reflected in bugzilla. (Not a big deal -- the "main" maintainer can simply reassign bugs based on branch.  Or, such reassignment could be automated with a script looking for bugs and the comaintainer's flag file.)
 * Maintainers can designate co-maintainers.

The record of co-maintainership will be kept in CVS in a  special file, much the way we currently employ dead.files and needs.rebuild.

Co-maintainers should have their email addresses added (one per line, standard "foo ") to a file maintained.by that should exist in each branch directory. No maintained.by == no co-maintainers. Note that there can be different maintainers for each branch.