| 1 |
On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 04:18:40PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> Dnia 2014-09-10, o godz. 07:53:31 Rich Freeman napisał(a): |
| 3 |
> > On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 7:33 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: |
| 4 |
> > > Personally I would vote for simply have a <maintainer> tag pointing to |
| 5 |
> > > the alias but we would still need to keep a list of real maintainers for |
| 6 |
> > > that alias as usually not all people listed in the alias are willing to |
| 7 |
> > > maintain the packages. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > I think the solution to this is that maintainers can be either: |
| 10 |
> > 1. Devs - identified by their email address. (simple enough) |
| 11 |
> > or |
| 12 |
> > 2. Projects - identified by their email alias. |
| 13 |
> > or |
| 14 |
> > 3. A proxy maintainer identified by email address (in which case |
| 15 |
> > either a dev or project must also be listed, potentially including the |
| 16 |
> > proxy maintainer project). |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> 4. A mail alias that is not project :). For example, we have clang@ for |
| 19 |
> easily aggregating all clang-related build failures and other bugs but |
| 20 |
> it isn't a formal team. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
As an incremental solution, what about a <watcher> tag in metadata.xml |
| 23 |
with the same format as <maintainer> except that being a watcher |
| 24 |
doesn't imply a willingness to *do* anything about a project, it just |
| 25 |
means you want to be notified of changes and added to the CC list. |
| 26 |
Then devs can sign up to maintain or watch packages without using |
| 27 |
herds. Folks who find herds convenient can continue to use them with |
| 28 |
as implied maintainers [1] (or implied watchers, I don't really care). |
| 29 |
Folks who don't find herds convenient can leave them and just add |
| 30 |
their maintainer/watcher tags directly. Then reap herds if/when they |
| 31 |
go empty. I don't see the need for a dramatic change here, or even |
| 32 |
one that requires much consensus building. Or is a <watcher> tag |
| 33 |
controversial? I'm not sure how the bugzilla CC lists are generated, |
| 34 |
maybe it would be terribly complicated to iterate over maintainers + |
| 35 |
watchers? |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Cheers, |
| 38 |
Trevor |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
[1]: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/92877 |
| 41 |
id:1410348781.5850.7.camel@g.o |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). |
| 45 |
For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy |
Archives