| 1 |
Lance Albertson wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hrm, this is making me wonder if a combined alias for new ebuilds and |
| 3 |
> ebuilds that need maintainers could be used. The current alias as |
| 4 |
> new-ebuilds probably wouldn't fit this as well. If seemant is up for it, |
| 5 |
> we could just use something like need-maintainers or something simliar |
| 6 |
> to that name? If we did that, would we still need the resolution? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
The way I see it is that if an ebuild is to be worked on and maintained by a |
| 9 |
particular developer/herd then it should be assigned to the relevant people as |
| 10 |
normal. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
If the ebuild doesn't stir up that much attention and nobody wants it, it |
| 13 |
should get reassigned to maintainer-needed@g.o, until someone picks it |
| 14 |
up or decides that the package is not worthy of being in the portage tree. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
An extra resolution would not be needed. I don't see the need for a |
| 17 |
new-ebuilds alias because everything can be categorised into the above two |
| 18 |
categories (someone is going to do something with this soon, or, there is no |
| 19 |
interest from that herd/developer at the current time). |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Daniel |
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives