Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2014 12:40:07 +0000 From: Steve Wills <swills@freebsd.org> To: Mathieu Arnold <mat@freebsd.org> Cc: svn-ports-head@freebsd.org, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@freebsd.org>, svn-ports-all@freebsd.org, Andrej Zverev <az@freebsd.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r344316 - in head/net-mgmt: . p5-Nagios-Plugin-Beanstalk p5-Nagios-Plugin-Beanstalk/files Message-ID: <20140304124004.GA42724@mouf.net> In-Reply-To: <0121329AE40C04B85EBA0ACC@ogg.in.absolight.net> References: <CAD5bB%2BiER-D3DzbwwDa_MASmhX75v=9B0VG_=MPNL%2BFWAmD3Rw@mail.gmail.com> <20140304112710.GA63353@FreeBSD.org> <0121329AE40C04B85EBA0ACC@ogg.in.absolight.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, Mar 04, 2014 at 01:24:36PM +0100, Mathieu Arnold wrote: > +--On 4 mars 2014 11:27:10 +0000 Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > | On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 11:04:39AM +0400, Andrej Zverev wrote: > |> > Submitted by: Andrew Thompson <thompsa@freebsd.org> > |> > +MAINTAINER= perl@FreeBSD.org > |> > |> I know this is old rule, but we don't like such practice (and i think > |> we still) when maintainer != submitter for a new port. > | > | I recall the rule was about that newly added ports should not be > | maintained by ports@. Meta-entities like x11@, perl@, python@, etc. make > | sense, and I don't see a problem here (if a port in question is ineeded > | of such a broad interest and/or importance). Maintainership was assigned to the submitter in r344639, so the discussion is moot at this point. > I do, perl@ is a handful of committers, on the top of my head, az, crees, > culot, sunpoet and myself, those are allowed to set the maintainer to perl@. I thought the list was: https://wiki.freebsd.org/Perl And while I haven't done as much perl stuff lately, I have in the past done a good bit of work on perl related ports. > For the other, the thing is clear, perl@ is not a garbage maintainer for > things people would like added but don't want to maintain after that. We > already have ports@ for that. > There is a policy for perl@ to handle Perl related PR, but only the PR, and > because committers there may have > > When we got perl@ created way back when, the idea was to have a team for > important Perl stuff, not for maintaining the whole of CPAN. With ruby stuff, we use the ruby@ maintainer for things that we would like any member of the team to be able to commit to as part of updating other things. Here I had thought that it might be a good way for the submitter to continue to submit updates while allowing others to also submit updates and get them committed quickly without having to wait for the dreaded maintainer timeout and at the same time avoiding the chaos that comes from having it assigned to ports@. But as I said, it's been assigned to maintainer by now so the point is moot. Steve
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20140304124004.GA42724>