From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mta08-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (mta08-winn.ispmail.ntl.com [81.103.221.48]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j5DMZQYi016667 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 22:35:26 GMT Received: from aamta12-winn.ispmail.ntl.com ([81.103.221.35]) by mta08-winn.ispmail.ntl.com with ESMTP id <20050613223559.VEOB6773.mta08-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@aamta12-winn.ispmail.ntl.com> for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 23:35:59 +0100 Received: from zog.reactivated.net ([81.99.81.161]) by aamta12-winn.ispmail.ntl.com with ESMTP id <20050613223559.TFND15401.aamta12-winn.ispmail.ntl.com@zog.reactivated.net> for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 23:35:59 +0100 Received: from [192.168.0.2] (dsd [192.168.0.2]) by zog.reactivated.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05D2F7586B3 for ; Mon, 13 Jun 2005 23:54:54 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <42AE0AD2.8010001@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 13 Jun 2005 23:38:10 +0100 From: Daniel Drake User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050403) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER References: <1118630128.32687.14.camel@powerix.local.c0ffeine.de> <20050613175506.GF5946@kfk4ever.com> <42ADCD31.5070001@gentoo.org> <200506132031.59264.genstef@gentoo.org> <42ADE358.3020602@gentoo.org> <1118699925.9459.3.camel@mirage.ramereth.lan> In-Reply-To: <1118699925.9459.3.camel@mirage.ramereth.lan> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.90.2.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: ae7027b2-382f-432b-b137-585c9538da35 X-Archives-Hash: 218f5f6fc4541bc93600b066989f6a3a Lance Albertson wrote: > Hrm, this is making me wonder if a combined alias for new ebuilds and > ebuilds that need maintainers could be used. The current alias as > new-ebuilds probably wouldn't fit this as well. If seemant is up for it, > we could just use something like need-maintainers or something simliar > to that name? If we did that, would we still need the resolution? The way I see it is that if an ebuild is to be worked on and maintained by a particular developer/herd then it should be assigned to the relevant people as normal. If the ebuild doesn't stir up that much attention and nobody wants it, it should get reassigned to maintainer-needed@gentoo.org, until someone picks it up or decides that the package is not worthy of being in the portage tree. An extra resolution would not be needed. I don't see the need for a new-ebuilds alias because everything can be categorised into the above two categories (someone is going to do something with this soon, or, there is no interest from that herd/developer at the current time). Daniel -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list