| 1 |
On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 23:28:05 +0200 |
| 2 |
René 'Necoro' Neumann <lists@××××××.eu> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Am 27.03.2011 22:44, schrieb Rich Freeman: |
| 5 |
> Well, but you need some way of communicate that certain packages are |
| 6 |
> w/o a proper maintainer. Why else should someone step up? I, for |
| 7 |
> instance, was quite surprised about the list of m-n packages and |
| 8 |
> seeing that quite some packages I use are on that list. I would never |
| 9 |
> had a look at it without this thread (or are users nowadays supposed |
| 10 |
> to check metadata.xml on a regular basis?). |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I remember distinctly that I once publicly proposed to change |
| 13 |
<http://packages.gentoo.org/> to actually interpret packages' |
| 14 |
<metadata.xml> and displaying its formatted contents on every |
| 15 |
<http://packages.gentoo.org/package/CAT/PKG> page (notably because the |
| 16 |
site mentioned and still mentions the last committer at the top of the |
| 17 |
page, with his or her Gentoo e-mail alias/handle plainly visible, so at |
| 18 |
the time I envisioned it to prevent people from addressing the |
| 19 |
wrong developers). <metadata.xml> is a mere link on every page and |
| 20 |
doesn't invite anyone to dig deeper, when it could be put to better |
| 21 |
use. Our bugzilla database already has proper descriptions for every |
| 22 |
alias we use, so we could reuse that information to improve |
| 23 |
packages.g.o. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
(Only, I cannot now find any trace of such a discussion at all, or even |
| 26 |
the bug report I am quite certain I would have filed about this.) |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
jer |
Archives