On Thu, Dec 09, 2010 at 08:19:15AM +0100, Andreas J. Koenig wrote:
> Sorry, I have missed what the original question was. Was it RAFL wants
> permissions to maintain ExtUtils::Command?
RAFL is working to dual life / update the cpan versions of numerous core
modules, a few at a time. I'd rather
d I can explain what made
me confused. Your first message with the subject "P5P-owned CPAN
modules" had an In-Reply-To header of
In-Reply-To:
pointing to an unrelated posting.
All's well, move on, there's nothing to see here...
Cheers,
--
andreas
On Thu, Dec 9, 2010 at 4:19 PM, Andreas J. Koenig
wrote:
> Most sense makes to do what is actually needed. Like in the relation of
> variables and scope, we prefer narrow scopes. Minimizing the number of
> permission assignments, not maximizing. Not because we distrust anybody
> but because we wa
> On Thu, 09 Dec 2010 07:54:12 +0900, brian d foy
> said:
>> Could you please grant RAFL comaint permissions on all modules owned by P5P
>> through whatever mechanism makes most sense on the PAUSE side
Most sense makes to do what is actually needed. Like in the relation of
variables a
[[ This message was both posted and mailed: see
the "To," "Cc," and "Newsgroups" headers for details. ]]
In article <20101208141328.ga17...@puppy>, Jesse Vincent
wrote:
> Could you please grant RAFL comaint permissions on all modules owned by P5P
> through whatever mechanism makes most sense
Hi folks,
Could you please grant RAFL comaint permissions on all modules owned by P5P
through whatever mechanism makes most sense on the PAUSE side? In my
ideal world, this would be an "add him to the list" mechanism, so that
it applies for new modules owned by P5P, but I'm not too picky.
Altern
