| 1 |
On Thu, 2004-05-27 at 19:16 -0700, Drake Wyrm wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I notice that the example herd in metadata.xml.skel is "no-herd". Is |
| 4 |
> this an acceptable default when no herd has yet accepted maintainership? |
| 5 |
> What about a default maintainer? Perhaps "nobody@g.o" I realize |
| 6 |
> that such entries probably look bad out of context, but it might help |
| 7 |
> raise flags where somebody needs to step in and take maintainership. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
no-herd is not acceptable in my opinion, even with an added single |
| 10 |
maintainer. There are already cases where such a setup lead to a package |
| 11 |
being silently unmaintained again. No, the point is to make an active |
| 12 |
search for maintainers (herds) and if those can't be found, well then |
| 13 |
maybe other measures need to be taken (masking out/removal?). |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
- foser |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
PS. I know there are metadata.xml's with only no-herd, those should be |
| 18 |
fixed too if encountered. |
Archives