Date: Sun, 23 Apr 2000 17:04:58 -0700 From: Jeremy Lea <reg@FreeBSD.ORG> To: Chuck Robey <chuckr@picnic.mat.net> Cc: FreeBSD-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Removing ports maintainers Message-ID: <20000423170458.B308@shale.csir.co.za> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0004231951580.331-100000@picnic.mat.net>; from chuckr@picnic.mat.net on Sun, Apr 23, 2000 at 07:55:59PM -0400 References: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0004231951580.331-100000@picnic.mat.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi,
On Sun, Apr 23, 2000 at 07:55:59PM -0400, Chuck Robey wrote:
> If this is being done because Kris can't get a response when he wants
> changes, and he doesn't want to wait, I think that possibly he's doing
> folks a disservice, because I think some mainatainer is probably better
> than none at all, and for the majority of what he's doing, that's going to
> be the ultimate effect.
I think he's doing the right thing. Inactive maintainers slow things
down. PR's sit in the database because it's been assigned to a
maintainer that's not looking, and so no one else fixes it. Major patch
sets go out for review and are delayed waiting for maintainers who never
respond...
If a port is broken or out of date and the maintainer is ports@ then
everyone knows that they can just fix it. I know when I've had sudden
spurts of fixing ports from bento's logs that I always start with the
ports with no maintainer.
Regards,
-Jeremy
--
FreeBSD - Because the best things in life are free...
http://www.freebsd.org/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20000423170458.B308>