Merging pull requests before 72 hours

[Perry E. Metzger]

On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 00:20:53 +0200 Mojca Miklavec
<mojca at macports.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Oct 2018 at 00:10, Blair Zajac wrote:
> >
> > We could add a rule that should help a bit that openmaintainer
> > only lets people do minor version bumps, e.g. X.Y to X.(Y+1) and
> > X.Y.Z to X.Y.(Z+1). This doesn’t solve the Lua 5.2 to 5.3 one,
> > but it would prevent the Python 2.7 to 3.7.  
> 
> This is pretty useless general strategy as a general rule because
> every project does the versioning in a different way. If we were to
> do it this way, then every single port would need to specify what
> precisely is allowed (to which versions it is ok to update).

Typically I presume that

1. if the person doing the update is skilled (and at this point I
generally know the difference),
2. if they indicate that they've tested the result,
3. if it seems based on history that the listed maintainer is unlikely
to comment then or ever (and I usually guess right),
4. and that if what's being done seems to be a simple version bump

that it is okay to merge a request against an openmaintainer port. I
think I've guessed wrong only a few times in many hundreds of pull
requests.

If these sorts of things aren't okay to merge pretty quickly, then
why do we have an openmaintainer designation at all? I mean, if
there's really no distinction in how you treat an openmaintainer and
a non-openmaintainer port, why have openmaintainer? Why not just have
everything closed maintainer?


Perry
-- 
Perry E. Metzger		pmetzger at macports.org