From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0ED8D1381F3 for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 14:48:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 66F6C21C08D; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 14:48:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8E43821C08F for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 14:48:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.132] (CPE002401f30b73-CM001cea3ddad8.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com [99.242.65.202]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: axs) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8764033C770 for ; Fri, 23 Nov 2012 14:48:11 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <50AF8CAF.3040008@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2012 09:48:15 -0500 From: Ian Stakenvicius User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:16.0) Gecko/20121112 Thunderbird/16.0.2 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] open season on other-dev's packages -- policy change? References: <20121123022210.GE4100@comet.hsd1.mn.comcast.net> <50AF84E9.2020608@gentoo.org> <50AF8916.9070004@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <50AF8916.9070004@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 8ed07747-e3fb-45fd-9592-31fdb57d8393 X-Archives-Hash: c93e6b36d9255dc28c26eb92cf108665 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 On 23/11/12 09:32 AM, Thomas Sachau wrote: > Ian Stakenvicius schrieb: >> On 22/11/12 11:22 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: >>> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 08:22:10PM -0600, Donnie Berkholz >>> wrote: >>>> On 11:11 Sun 18 Nov , Robin H. Johnson wrote: >>>>> Here's a list of every package where I'm a maintainer and >>>>> there is no herd listed (but their might be other >>>>> maintainers): >>> I didn't say I was dropping any of the packages, merely making >>> an explicit list of packages I maintain, that other developers >>> are welcome to touch - if they want to take them over >>> explicitly, that would be great too. >> >> >> .. For certain things, I think it would be very beneficial for >> this to be true (other dev's welcome to touch) across the tree. >> Maybe if there is enough general support for it, we should change >> our default of "never touch a maintainer's package without >> permission of the maintainer/herd", to "OK to touch unless >> package metadata explicitly requests not to" ...? And we can put >> a tag in the metadata to indicate this (or even to indicate what >> other dev's can and can't touch -- ie, can touch *DEPEND, can >> bump EAPI, cannot add features, cannot bump)? >> >> Thoughts? >> >> >> > > What certain things do you have in mind? In wich situation do you > see a simple "May i touch the package?/ok for this patch?" as too > much to do before touching a package? > This works, and when, say, myself and the other dev are on irc it's very quick, but then if I don't write it down or communicate it to my other couterparts in the herd this permission gets lost in the shuffle. I'm just suggesting that if we put it in the metadata then it'll be easier to track. And -maybe- if the majority of dev's feel it appropriate, then we switch "deny,allow x" to "allow,deny x". -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlCvjK8ACgkQ2ugaI38ACPDNggEArddTaH+ng/JhbH2AIq0ecI3n qZipGtd4j8wmrQZIhz0BALVAsDcVOoBsrqGk2KpwGCag0o3QTSd/nx+4Y9i/Ddnw =MbHC -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----