From owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Jul 18 10:40:28 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 456C31065670 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:40:28 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from utisoft@gmail.com) Received: from mail-bk0-f54.google.com (mail-bk0-f54.google.com [209.85.214.54]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4C628FC16 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:40:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bkcje9 with SMTP id je9so1283628bkc.13 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 03:40:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=rIWC6l8UH8M65AuCY4k39+4maHKZ891RxKm9GypJlKA=; b=GtkOLeZ10njoZHgxdlnD/YYAPO8pi/zXoX5TTG7jIqyRFXpw7KYPqtBEhrYvE3ruKu azcvxHcQdQRqRBeosY6UPEPnNuUDn7GwJiBNl1t90xVWGOdf2lq7yuS2NIJhNdfmh8bj tRcxA9k6kdzHyYs28tk2ODhQ304vXOfdP5O9WNyaUqeutJX0g6xZYw+AIgTNexix1XKw JQyIqPP9RXuMQk72wM5W3aoSbX8FGgUagPC8K9iIYvFhfZVFcBUos6x0vd53b33mwZBC 7ImqNL2+yoGt+gedVZZUiDSMq9us9iEUxSsFONK0KvkPYDaNHCRYYeYKW963Ik4T/5VJ JOrg== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.205.133.11 with SMTP id hw11mr1227094bkc.46.1342608026680; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 03:40:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.49.87 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 03:40:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.49.87 with HTTP; Wed, 18 Jul 2012 03:40:26 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <500690C9.5080700@marino.st> References: <50017C97.3050200@filez.com> <20120714192119.GA61563@vniz.net> <5001CB97.6070205@filez.com> <50054F6E.9040002@filez.com> <50055293.3010002@FreeBSD.org> <20120717213902.GB21825@lonesome.com> <5005E2AE.3040806@marino.st> <20120717224302.GA26742@lonesome.com> <50065B3B.8040404@marino.st> <500690C9.5080700@marino.st> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 11:40:26 +0100 Message-ID: From: Chris Rees To: John Marino Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.5 Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: maintainer timeout for FreeBSD commiters X-BeenThere: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Porting software to FreeBSD List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 10:40:28 -0000 On 18 Jul 2012 11:33, "John Marino" wrote: > > On 7/18/2012 12:19, Chris Rees wrote: >> >> On 18 Jul 2012 07:44, "John Marino" wrote: >>> >>> Yes, somebody would have to set that up but it would pay big dividend I >> >> think. >> >> It also does away with the QA aspect that committers currently provide. >> I'd like to repeat that people sufficiently familiar with the ports system >> to QA patches generally ends up with a commit bit fairly quickly. >> >> Chris > > > > I wouldn't assume people that become this proficient necessarily want a commit bit. > > The whole point of my proposal is give and take. > Yes, you take away "QA" responsibility from an entire pool of committers and make it the primary responsibility of this new class of maintainer on a per port basis (and not nearly all ports either). I was proposing that your gains (much less PRs, more often maintained ports) far outweigh the liabilities. I would be selective who gets assigned to this new class. They should have a body of work that instills confidence that they can handle QA. > > You don't get something for nothing and it's not hard to revoke the privilege if a person can't handle it. You are making a good point, but I'm trying to explain that the 'body of work' for proposing a new developer is no greater than the standard you suggest. We do have developers who only commit to their own ports; while it's generally hoped that they work on PRs too, it's not a requirement. These would fall under the category of 'super maintainers' if you like. For further reading, Google 'Solutions for the PR load problem'. Chris