Maintainer away tracking

[Daniel J. Luke]

On Mar 17, 2008, at 9:37 AM, Rainer Müller wrote:
> So, this proposal was out now for about a week and nobody replied.  
> If you don't like it, please tell me at least why you think it is  
> not a good idea.

We already have the 72 hour timeout, the option of putting  
'openmaintainer' on our ports or having co-maintainers who can also  
commit.

In addition, ports that are seriously broken (ie, don't build,  
security vulnerability, distfile no longer available) can be fixed to  
work (without major changes) without waiting for the timeout already.

I don't see the additional speed benefit as worth the extra book  
keeping.

That said, I'm not going to object if others want to use it (I do know  
that I don't really plan on advertising to the world any time I may be  
going away on vacation).

--
Daniel J. Luke
+========================================================+
| *---------------- dluke at geeklair.net ----------------* |
| *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* |
+========================================================+
|   Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily   |
|          reflect the opinions of my employer.          |
+========================================================+



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20080317/2c055c9e/PGP.bin