Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Robin H. Johnson" <robbat2@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Prioritising contact information in metadata.xml
Date: Thu, 01 May 2008 11:46:19
Message-Id: 20080501114629.GK1491@curie-int.orbis-terrarum.net
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: Prioritising contact information in metadata.xml by "Tiziano Müller"
1 On Thu, May 01, 2008 at 07:34:51AM +0200, Tiziano M?ller wrote:
2 > Jeroen Roovers wrote:
3 > > All in all I guess we need to make the rules up as we go and decide
4 > > policy later. I suggest the first herd/address in the list should be
5 > > the primary contact. If you don't agree with that, please consult
6 > > metadata.xml for the package or reassign to bug-wranglers with an
7 > > explanation (and perhaps a promise to quickly change metadata.xml. :)
8 > We're using XML 1.0 and as far as I know (please correct me if I'm wrong)
9 > does the specification not guarantee element order. And because of this I
10 > don't understand why we're not introducing a new attribute (let's call
11 > it "primary_maintainer") which can be set to "true" for the primary
12 > herd/maintainer (and which is being interpreted as "false" if not present).
13 > Then it's clear which address has to be put in Bugzilla's "Assigned To:"
14 > field...
15 Here was the original discussion and proposal on how to handle this:
16 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/48485
17
18 Why didn't it happen? No time to implement it basically.
19
20 --
21 Robin Hugh Johnson
22 Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy
23 E-Mail : robbat2@g.o
24 GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85