Date: 18 Jan 2000 15:36:19 -0800 From: asami@FreeBSD.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> Cc: Brian Fundakowski Feldman <green@FreeBSD.org>, Munechika SUMIKAWA <sumikawa@FreeBSD.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: ports/security/openssh Makefile ports/security/openssh/patches patch-ad Message-ID: <vqcwvp7lzpo.fsf@silvia.hip.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: "Jordan K. Hubbard"'s message of "Tue, 18 Jan 2000 11:28:40 -0800" References: <99185.948223720@zippy.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> * Before you make suggestions about how to solve this, let's discuss the * "multiple maintainer problem" in more detail. We don't need a kludge * to this one, we need a real mechanism which allows for this so we don't * end up back in this discussion again. What we have is an unknown number of scripts out there that assume MAINTAINER is a single e-mail address, since that has been the rule for many years. I don't wish to break those scripts nor try to find out how many will break, I think it is perfectly fine to have only one maintainer (address) per port, after all it's called MAINTAINER and not MAINTAINERS. Can we return to our regularly scheduled release engineering now? :) -PW To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?vqcwvp7lzpo.fsf>