-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 23/03/15 01:22 PM, Tim Harder wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> Having been around for a few years I've inherited or added quite a
> few pkgs to the tree that I wouldn't mind other people
> fixing/bumping/etc that don't fall into any current herds.
>
> With that in mind, I think it would be an interesting experiment if
> we had a collaborative herd (probably named "collab") that signals
> the status that anyone is generally free to fix, bump, or do sane
> things to the pkgs with the caveat that you fix what you break.
>
> Anyone else interested in such a setup?
>
> Tim
>
The idea sounds great to me, and is something I've been
armchair-lobbying for over the past couple of years as well.
Implementation-wise, I share others' views that using the <herd> tag
probably isn't a good idea. Where I ran into a wall, however, was
exactly what the metadata tag(s) should be. I ended up just keeping a
list of devs' that i've talked to over the years that are fine with
me/others touching their packages.
It would be very helpful IMO to have this per-package in metadata, one
way or another. Given all of the possible specifics we could do here,
what are people's thoughts on a two-tag approach -- 1,
<nmu>{yes,no}</nmu> , for a quick means to see if the primary
maintainer is OK with non-maintainer updates; 2,
<maintainer-notes>...</maintainer-notes> , for general instructions
regarding package maintenance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iF4EAREIAAYFAlURa9sACgkQ2ugaI38ACPCtOwD/ca0Y+wiVVCbl1trBmPRWL4TG
JXpjYoQyl0GE2jdU7jMA/3v43v56GF/7WXwNF6CtezuIIACFXsnadRhmv1v6majp
=cS5M
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
