1 |
On 03/09/2012 09:48 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: |
2 |
> El vie, 09-03-2012 a las 16:57 +0100, Michał Górny escribió: |
3 |
>> On Fri, 09 Mar 2012 09:02:23 +0100 |
4 |
>> Pacho Ramos<pacho@g.o> wrote: |
5 |
>> |
6 |
>>> El dom, 04-03-2012 a las 13:56 +0100, Pacho Ramos escribió: |
7 |
>>>> El dom, 04-03-2012 a las 13:51 +0100, Pacho Ramos escribió: |
8 |
>>>>> El dom, 04-03-2012 a las 13:47 +0100, Pacho Ramos escribió: |
9 |
>>>>>> Even if they have some people in their mail aliases, looks like |
10 |
>>>>>> herds are empty. If nobody volunteers to join to them, I think |
11 |
>>>>>> we should drop that herds and move their packages to |
12 |
>>>>>> maintainer-needed in a week or so. |
13 |
>>>>>> |
14 |
>>>>>> What do you think? |
15 |
>>>>>> |
16 |
>>>>> |
17 |
>>>>> The same applies to "sgml" now that cryos is retiring :( |
18 |
>>>> |
19 |
>>>> and text-markup, I think it's the last empty herd now |
20 |
>>> |
21 |
>>> Maybe we could do the same as did in the past for openoffice herd: |
22 |
>>> - Change metadatas and bugs to assign them to maintainer-needed (and |
23 |
>>> reflect reality) |
24 |
>>> - Keep herd in metadatas and CCed them to bug reports |
25 |
>>> |
26 |
>>> The other option would be to simply drop that herds, assign packages |
27 |
>>> to maintainer-needed and wait developers to grab whatever they want |
28 |
>> |
29 |
>> For net-zope, I'd prefer dropping it. We decided to get rid of Zope, |
30 |
>> removed almost all relevant packages, so there's no point in keeping |
31 |
>> the herd. |
32 |
>> |
33 |
> |
34 |
> OK but, what about the rest? ;) |
35 |
|
36 |
Please leave at least media-optical@ be as it is. Changing it doesn't |
37 |
make any sense. |