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

[Eric Hall]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 11:20:56AM -0700, markd at macports.org wrote:
> macports-dev at lists.macosforge.org on Saturday, March 31, 2007 at 10:25 AM
> -0800 wrote:
> >Revision
> >[ http://trac.macosforge.org/projects/macports/changeset/23415 ]23415
> >Author
> >landonf at macports.org
> >Date
> >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 bugs filed against it for ages and the port was pretty outdated.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
> tickets.
> 

	There was a rule about bugs being free for anyone to fix/patch/commit
after notifying the port maintainer and a 72 hour timeout.
	Has that been removed, or just lost to the fog of time?
	Is that a rule that people are comfortable with?



		-eric