Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 15:17:11 -0700 From: Alexander Botero-Lowry <alexbl@FreeBSD.org> To: freebsd-python@FreeBSD.org Subject: python@ as ports maintainer Message-ID: <20070417221751.DA4AA3A073@cherenkov.geekfire.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi everyone, I've been seeing a trend lately that I find a bit disturbing and I just wanted to lay down the official python@ policy on this issue. The trend I'm referring to is the setting of python@ on python consumer ports without first discussing it with the python@ list. Early on, perky@ and I decided we didn't want python@ to be a dumping ground for any python consumer and that we wanted to carefully think through the ports that were directly maintained by the group with the out look of providing better QA for a small subset of important and critical ports related to or used heavily by Python consumers. That being said, we feel that if every python consumer in ports is owned by python@ we can not sufficently provide support to maintain and keep them up to date. What is good for a small number of ports becomes unmanigable at a larger number, just like ports maintained by ports@ though more accessible to committers tend to see less updates and fixes simply because there are just so many of them. So please, in the future if you commit a python consumer to ports ask us before opting to set the maintainer to python@, and if you see any ports owned by python@ that might fit into the category of not critical or heavily used please ask to take maintainership. Thanks!
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20070417221751.DA4AA3A073>