Merging pull requests before 72 hours

[Ryan Schmidt]

On Oct 22, 2018, at 02:56, Vincent Habchi wrote:

>> On 22 Oct 2018, at 06:32, Ryan Schmidt <ryandesign at macports.org> wrote:
>>> And yes, we have a huge number of people assigned as maintainers who
>>> no longer maintain the ports. We really need to clean up the list in
>>> order to reflect the reality.
>> 
>> It is indeed a problem that we have many ports which claim to be maintained by someone who does not do so. We should clarify for contributors, maybe by rewriting the section of the guide, what being a maintainer means. We should not pressure people into maintaining a port, just because they submitted it. They should enter into the maintenance commitment voluntarily and with full knowledge of what we expect from them in return. We should also do a better job of pointing out that if someone is no longer able to maintain a port, they should let us know as soon as possible, so that we can remove them; too many people leave without telling us they're doing so.
> 
> I’m not sure I’ve anything meaningful to add here, but there should also be an official timeout guideline for tickets which include a patch. If, say, the maintainer doesn’t react within a “reasonable amount of time”, by which I mean a couple of days, a week at most, then anyone else should be allowed to go ahead and commit rather than let the process stall. That would probably ease the flow rather than clog it. 
> 
> Just my tuppence, and, as usual, I’m not sure it’s even worth it.

That's one of things our existing 72-hour timeout period is for. It's not specific to patchfiles; it's for any issue that the maintainer hasn't responded to.