Bryan Ãstergaard wrote: > Ok, let me see if I can get this straight.. You're saying that > maintainer-needed requires less communication overhead compared to > ebuilds with maintainers assigned? And that maintainer-needed is > therefore better than ebuilds having maintainers.
agreed. I prefer to fix ebuilds in maintainer-needed than maintained ebuilds because communication takes eternally compared to fixing simple things quickly. >> the committer in this case has no interest in maintaining the thing. And >> for proxying it does not matter who is proxying. > Of course it matters. There's a big difference between a proxy > maintainer having to ask a *specific* dev that's proxying his ebuild > updates/changes or trying to find a random dev willing to help. I will of course commit all fixes when anyone asks me to. But it does not matter if I commit them or anyone else who cares and has access levels. >> this does not allow the actual maintainer to close the bug and causes a >> lot of bugspam for a person who does not care about it and should be only >> contacted in the end to commit fixes/patches/bumps. > Shouldn't matter too much as a gentoo dev is still responsible for the > package? of course he is still responsible. Does not mean he likes to get 10 mails about people asking for stable keywords and arches stabilizing every month. > Nobody shoud be adding stuff to portage without taking > responsibility for it. I am not adding stuff. I am fixing existing packages. And I am taking responsibility. The maintainer can always assign me bugs if he thinks I should take care of them and I read and take care of them anyway because I am on maintainer-needed. - Stefan PS: mailing lists are a bit broken. 3 people answer me and ask almost the same and I answer almost the same again .. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
