On 27 August 2012 08:40, Julian H. Stacey <j...@berklix.com> wrote: > On various other older ports, when I couldnt get response in time > from MAINTAINER (I don't mean re hylafax), perhaps maintainer on > holiday, & I couldn't wait for send-pr tiem out, & didnt want to > invoke send-pr, I fell back succesfully, to contacting the Whom: > creator, who while no longer regularly motivated to do maintenance, > could respond without delay & give hints (fallback maintainer).
Which is exactly the reason we should get rid of the whom lines. The submitter is *not* a fallback maintainer, and some users mistakenly assume that the whom line is the maintainer. We should be encouraging users to mail po...@freebsd.org and possibly cc the maintainer if required. > Some ports are easy to create, eg my lang/pbasic, but some are > hard, (eg I'd guess editors/openoffice-3 may have been, One might ask > # Whom: Martin Blapp The whom address might be bouncing, the person might be not be using FreeBSD anymore, or any of the like. > Let ports creators retain their one line of credit. Removing it > would save little & be ungrateful, like removing names out of .c > & .h. (Some (inc. me) may like noticing in passing who created > the ports one's working on)). The credit may encourage some ports > creators to struggle on, creating sometimes obdurate complex ports > one might otherwise be tempted to give up on after a not-yet-port > is just hand built & hand tested localy, Interesting argument. But this implies that we should allow the whom line to be changed by "creator request" -- Eitan Adler _______________________________________________ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
