On Oct 22, 2018, at 02:56, Vincent Habchi wrote: >> On 22 Oct 2018, at 06:32, Ryan Schmidt <ryandes...@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.
