Date: Sat, 11 Jul 2020 17:56:38 +0200 From: Kurt Jaeger <pi@freebsd.org> To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org, freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: bugzilla messages about issues related to freebsd-ports, freebsd-multimedia, ... Message-ID: <20200711155638.GM39563@home.opsec.eu> In-Reply-To: <20200711134110.GA4973@c720-r342378> References: <20200711112755.GA3908@c720-r342378> <20200711113510.GQ1462@albert.catwhisker.org> <20200711134110.GA4973@c720-r342378>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
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... -- pi@opsec.eu +49 171 3101372 Now what ?
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20200711155638.GM39563>