new ports and maintainer

[Ryan Schmidt]

On Aug 8, 2014, at 11:48 PM, Sean Farley wrote:

> Ryan Schmidt writes:
> 
>> On Aug 8, 2014, at 10:59 PM, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> 
>>> port echo name:^p5- and maintainer:nomaintainer
>>> 
>>> How would you produce that list if "nomaintainer" and "openmaintainer" were combined into a single value?
>> 
>> Thinking about it a bit more, I guess the answer is that it is a regular expression search so I could just anchor it to the beginning and end.
>> 
>> Ports I am the only maintainer of:
>> 
>> 
>> $ port echo maintainer:^ryandesign$|wc -l
>>     357
>> 
>> 
>> Ports I maintain with others or openly:
>> 
>> 
>> $ port echo maintainer:ryandesign|wc -l
>>     908
> 
> :-)
> 
> In general, these kinds of problems are a matter of implementation, not
> design. For instance, we could augment this language to have finer grain
> search operators:
> 
> $ port echo maintainer:(ryandesign and not openmaintainer)

That can already be done:


$ port echo maintainer:ryandesign and not maintainer:openmaintainer | wc -l
     369


Although that search takes a lot longer than it really should.

But the issue at hand was not finding maintained ports without openmaintainer; the issue was differentiating maintained-but-open ports from unmaintained ports in a hypothetical future where we no longer use separate terms, and I used my own handle as an example. But as I said using a double-anchored regular expression would work.

In fact I've proposed combining openmaintainer and nomaintainer before. But would this actually get us anything useful?