| 1 |
Am Montag 13 Juni 2005 20:15 schrieb Daniel Drake: |
| 2 |
> Maurice van der Pot wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Do you have a date or thread subject or something like that? I can't |
| 4 |
> > find it in the archives. I would like to see some reasons why one or the |
| 5 |
> > other is better. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> I can't remember and I can't see it in the archives. Maybe I was |
| 8 |
> dreaming... |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I think it logically fits better into having its own assignee. Most |
| 11 |
> resolutions suggest that no further action is needed, I don't think this is |
| 12 |
> the case here (remember we are talking about RESOLVED NEEDMAINTAINER...) |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> As well as that, people could add themselves to the email alias if they are |
| 15 |
> interested. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
I think its better to leave the package on the right alias, because its easier |
| 18 |
to find all pkges without maintainer for a certain herd then. |
| 19 |
Most of the people will want to start with only one herd to get ebuilds added, |
| 20 |
so it imo makes really sense to leave them grouped. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Reassigning to need-maintainer@ would remove the herd-information and |
| 23 |
therefore I am against it. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Stefan |
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives