| 1 |
Kevin F. Quinn wrote: |
| 2 |
> I don't think it's a good idea for devs to be putting stuff into the |
| 3 |
> tree without taking responsibility for it. |
| 4 |
sure I can put myself in there but it will help no one because I cannot test |
| 5 |
the thing. Furthermore I am actually part of maintainer-needed and commit |
| 6 |
fixes there. I am also on the maintainer-needed email alias. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Also maintainer-needed makes obvious to everyone that they do not have to |
| 9 |
ask me to fix sth. or take over the package -> less communication overhead. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> I would expect that either |
| 12 |
> the herd is set appropriately (which means either the committer be a |
| 13 |
> member of the herd, or the herd explicitly agree to be proxy), |
| 14 |
which is the case here. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> or the |
| 17 |
> committer be listed as a maintainer email address along with whoever is |
| 18 |
> being proxied. |
| 19 |
the committer in this case has no interest in maintaining the thing. And for |
| 20 |
proxying it does not matter who is proxying. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> Further I believe bugs against such packages should be |
| 23 |
> assigned to the @gentoo.org address (proxy maintainer if there is one, |
| 24 |
> herd otherwise), and CC'ed to the proxied maintainer address. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
this does not allow the actual maintainer to close the bug and causes a lot |
| 27 |
of bugspam for a person who does not care about it and should be only |
| 28 |
contacted in the end to commit fixes/patches/bumps. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Regards, |
| 31 |
Stefan |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives