On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò <flamee...@flameeyes.eu>wrote:
> > On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Alex Alexander <wi...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >> >> On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò < >> flamee...@flameeyes.eu> wrote: >> >>> I don't understand people's insistence with a single product herd given >>> we don't have enough manpower yet and I don't want to have an explosion of >>> aliases I need to subscribe to, the spam is enough as it is. >> >> >> Herds are definitely not the solution for everything, but they make sense >> when you have multiple people interested in maintaining large sets of >> ebuilds. If nothing else, they make life easier for bug wranglers, >> especially when you have >2 maintainers. >> > > You read my comment the wrong way (or I wrote it too hastily to be > understood). I mean I don't see the need to split sysadmin herd in three or > more. Sure there is stuff in sysadmin that I don't care about because I > don't use, but nothing forces me to maintain all of it. And if nobody cares > about I'm perfectly fine to mark it as m-n. > > But I don't see the point in saying "well, nobody cares about nagios but > two people, so we're moving it to a nagios herd". Might as well just use > the two maintainers there, then. > > Yes I know I haven't been active at all. My time management is terrible > and even after meeting Tom Limoncelli in person I doubt I'll magically > start getting better at it, but I'll try to work on it. > I misunderstood you, I thought you were comparing having herds to not having herds at all, my bad. I replied hastily and didn't consider that nagios and friends are part of a herd already. I agree that splitting herds is not necessary in a case like this. -- Alex Alexander + wired + www.linuxized.com + www.leetworks.com
