Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 12:53:00 +0200 From: Matthias Apitz <guru@unixarea.de> To: <freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: bugzilla messages about issues related to freebsd-ports, =?iso-8859-1?Q?freebsd-multimedia, _...?= Message-ID: <5c74bce0-9772-4b62-ba62-d7712aa42572@unixarea.de> In-Reply-To: <20200711155638.GM39563@home.opsec.eu> References: <20200711112755.GA3908@c720-r342378> <20200711113510.GQ1462@albert.catwhisker.org> <20200711134110.GA4973@c720-r342378>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On Saturday, 11 July 2020 17:56:38 CEST, Kurt Jaeger <pi@freebsd.org> wrote: > Hi! > >> why as MAINTAINER a full discussion(!) mailing list is used? > > Having individuals as maintainers can cause delays in > approving patches and providing updates. So at some time in the > past, some groups of port maintainers choose to band together > and have a mailing list -- and changed the MAINTAINER to > the list, so that each member of the list could update the port, > if it was needed. > > This can cause other delays, because no-one might feel responsible > for a port, so recently, bugmeister@ choose to add (Nobody) to > some of the group maintainers, so that others do not wait > for group approval. > > It's a problem of assigning some feel of 'ownership and responsibility' > on the one hand and delegation on the other. > > I take it from your question that you feel this is not a good > solution... > Yes. In this case, it would be better to create additional mailing-lists for this collective approach like, example, freebsd-multimedia-maintainer@ ... Don't you agree? matthias -- Sent from my Ubuntu phone http://www.unixarea.de/ NO to the EU! NEIN zur EU!help
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?5c74bce0-9772-4b62-ba62-d7712aa42572>