From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NtScX-0007nX-Br for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:23:41 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 331E1E093D; Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:23:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tommyserver.de (unknown [85.14.198.50]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3699AE084E for ; Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:23:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.178.22] (p4FDF1B09.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.223.27.9]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by tommyserver.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id BACAFA4D8 for ; Sun, 21 Mar 2010 22:23:04 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4BA68E2F.6080002@gentoo.org> Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2010 22:22:55 +0100 From: Thomas Sachau Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Empty herd: sgml References: <4BA613EB.8000308@gentoo.org> <201003211306.17030.vapier@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <201003211306.17030.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 OpenPGP: id=211CA2D4 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig85EE8A427AAEC0641CC9BF88" X-Archives-Salt: 52a0f5ae-6459-4f31-9db9-ab466af5a312 X-Archives-Hash: bd295740132a23c8c7f92ace4c7ab363 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig85EE8A427AAEC0641CC9BF88 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Am 21.03.2010 18:06, schrieb Mike Frysinger: > On Sunday 21 March 2010 08:41:15 Thomas Sachau wrote: >> I see, that the sgml herd seems to be empty for a longer time, so i wo= uld >> like to ask, if someone wants to take that herd and the related ebuild= s >> and bugs over or if we should delete that herd and assign related >> ebuilds/bugs to m-n. >=20 > if someone were to step up, we'd have to undo any changes we just did. = why=20 > not add m-n to the herd definition. > -mike What exactly do you suggest? My suggestion is to give people some time to join that herd (which had op= en bugs back from 2006!) for some time and if nothing happens, remove this unused herd and assign = bugs and ebuilds to m-n, so people at least see, that those ebuilds are not maintained, instead of ge= tting the false impression of maintainership by an empty herd. --=20 Thomas Sachau Gentoo Linux Developer --------------enig85EE8A427AAEC0641CC9BF88 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEKAAYFAkumjjUACgkQG7kqcTWJkGcCcwP/RyM4bGCwDrIINo+RI1h77GS5 moOJriRcProHEYiDqtJZJ1KAs7j6bb8Rw6124jZ8SgxdXBtPSon5zst52zkgZ+xB TA9i1gHQp3t6fL2L2sPpKDkQK1sc7+8+4/pSJCocnRIZZp1WnTzW7e+mGbh1YSu/ 2or5JY9i/jWavnkUqks= =dYhr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig85EE8A427AAEC0641CC9BF88--