| 1 |
On Tue, Dec 9, 2014 at 11:04 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Dnia 2014-12-09, o godz. 12:59:26 |
| 3 |
> Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> As the previously stated goal was to get rid of herds, I don't |
| 7 |
>> understand why you want to reintroduce them as a value of the |
| 8 |
>> type attribute. The existing herd elements should become either |
| 9 |
>> type="project" or type="team" (everything that is not a project, |
| 10 |
>> I suppose). |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> As I said, I don't care what final values are. I added a lot of options |
| 13 |
> to make people happy. As far as I'm concerned, the whole type="" can go |
| 14 |
> away. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I thought we were generally agreed we wanted to get rid of herds. The |
| 17 |
goal wasn't to rename them, but to get rid of them. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
We could have email aliases for bugs so that people can sign up for |
| 20 |
notifications, but they would NOT be considered maintainers. Of |
| 21 |
course, any would be welcome to become actual maintainers, but as far |
| 22 |
as treecleaning/etc goes the package is unmaintained. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
If we just rename "herd" to "team" then we have the same issue where |
| 25 |
nobody can tell if anybody is taking care of anything because it all |
| 26 |
goes into some nebulous bin full of packages where nobody is |
| 27 |
responsible for anything in particular, and nobody can speak for the |
| 28 |
"team" because it isn't really a team. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
How about "contact" instead of team. A package could have any number |
| 31 |
of contacts, and they just get CC'ed on bugs, and there is no meaning |
| 32 |
to a contact besides being CC'ed on bugs. They're never assignees - |
| 33 |
if there is nobody else in metadata besides a contact then the |
| 34 |
assignee is maintainer-wanted. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Rich |
Archives