Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Jeroen Roovers <jer@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Two herds (and four extra?)
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:58:50
Message-Id: 20100721145833.1a7d84ad@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Two herds (and four extra?) by "Tony \\\"Chainsaw\\\" Vroon"
1 On Wed, 21 Jul 2010 13:36:26 +0100
2 "Tony \"Chainsaw\" Vroon" <chainsaw@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > This was originally done because we were bypassing a herd (lead) in
5 > getting our updates in. Toning it down is not a problem, would just
6 > blueness in the list address your concerns?
7
8 Current b-w policy is to assign to the first mentioned <maintainer>,
9 then CC all other <maintainer>s and <herd>s[1], so if blueness has no
10 problem with that, then sure.
11
12
13 jer
14
15
16 [1] Or why would you mention them separately? I think we should still
17 encourage developers to join herds.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Two herds (and four extra?) "Anthony G. Basile" <blueness@g.o>