| 1 |
On Thu, Apr 26, 2007 at 05:46:24PM -0400, Daniel Drake wrote: |
| 2 |
> Robin H. Johnson wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Case 2 - Metadata contains a single maintainer |
| 4 |
> > ---------------------------------------------- |
| 5 |
> > - The herd field is not used. |
| 6 |
> > - The maintainer address is used as the bugzilla assignee. |
| 7 |
> At least for some packages I'm involved with, this will result in me |
| 8 |
> deleting myself from metadata.xml (but I'd rather not do so). |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I like these bugs to go to the herd, not me directly. I get the bug mail |
| 11 |
> anyway (I'm in the herd) but sometimes other herd members who see the mail |
| 12 |
> jump in and help resolve the bug, for which I'm very grateful. |
| 13 |
This is handled by a later case in the proposal. |
| 14 |
Simply interest a maintainer element with the herd email address, and |
| 15 |
add the contact=0 attribute to your maintainer element in the file. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> That aside, I like having myself in the metadata alongside the herd, to |
| 18 |
> point out that I am the primary maintainer within the herd for the package |
| 19 |
> in question. It is also useful for others so that when they have questions |
| 20 |
> about the package, they know who to approach on IRC or whatever. |
| 21 |
This is exactly the reason that I proposed the contact=0 attribute - for |
| 22 |
some of the packages that I maintain, I do not want the bugs assigned |
| 23 |
directly to me, but to the herd instead. While for others I _do_ want |
| 24 |
the duplicate. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Robin Hugh Johnson |
| 28 |
Gentoo Linux Developer & Council Member |
| 29 |
E-Mail : robbat2@g.o |
| 30 |
GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 |
Archives