On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 05:30:22PM -0700, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > Kris Kennaway wrote: > >Maxim, > > > >For some reason you have ignored at least 2 emails from portmgr > >inquiring why you have been making apparently unapproved commits to > >other people's ports (your previous 3 commits were such). Since you > >are ignoring our private emails I have no choice but to ask you > >publically to respond immediately. > > I apologize, due to some ages old filter (leftover from the time when I > was on portmgr) the messages went into the wrong folder, which I don't > check. Now I see them. > > Regarding the commits in question: are there any technical problems with > my changes? If my memory serves in the past there were general agreement > that maintainer's approval is good, but is not strictly required for the > cases when the change is obvious. Unfortunately I don't have much spare > time in my hands nowadays so that need to send e-mail for each of those > small fixes could be a showstopper for me and result in them staying in > my private tree. That being said, I don't ask to make an exception for > me based on that and if you say that the policy now is that maintainer > approval is strictly required I will adhere. > > Another generic note from my experience with other open source projects, > is that usually ones with not-so-strict approval rules tend to make much > faster progress.
As far as I know that has never been the policy. If you are worried that you will not have time later to follow up, you can just send a PR and let the system work as designed: this method seems to work well enough for all our non-committers out there ;-) Kris
pgpOEBVWx6MIz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
