[23415] trunk/dports/archivers/zlib/Portfile

markd at macports.org markd at macports.org
Sat Mar 31 11:20:56 PDT 2007

macports-dev at lists.macosforge.org on Saturday, March 31, 2007 at 10:25 AM
-0800 wrote:
>[ http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/changeset/23415 ]23415
>landonf at macports.org
>2007-03-31 10:25:27 -0700 (Sat, 31 Mar 2007)
>Log Message
>Claiming ownership of my port entirely.
Are there ports where you are listed maintainer that you shouldn't be?  I
think to be sure someone respects your maintainership, you should make
sure that you are only listed as maintainer one ones you really actively
maintain.  I really wan't aware you were still active and I supposed there
were a bunch of ports that you used to maintain and currently didn't but
never formally relinquished.  For example, I just updated openldap days
ago and you are listed as maintainer.  But there have been 3 verifiable
bugs filed against it for ages and the port was pretty outdated.

In my view, MacPorts only keeps functioning because of the efforts of a
few that sometimes need to bend the rules with some judgement, because
there aren't enough people concerned with fixing bugs that we can
reasonably expect those people to adhere to all the rules we set up.  If
we had more people doing it we could more closely adhere to the standards
we've setup.  A bureaucratic system with few people doesn't work very well
when those few have to choose between getting things done for others and
maximizing their volunteer time.

I'm not criticizing or complaining, I'm just saying how things appear to
me because, frankly, I bend the rules a lot because I don't see another
way right now.  The project seems to have more users than it once did and
tickets are opened faster, but it doesn't seem like there are many
responsive maintainers so that we rely on a few consistent bug chasers and
committers that sometimes bend the rules to keep from getting swamped by


More information about the macports-dev mailing list