From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [216.145.245.197] (helo=mx01.dls.net) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LmCnW-00030Z-IH for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 21:00:31 +0100 Received: from [209.242.7.134] (helo=[192.168.231.111]) by mx01.dls.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1LmCm2-00064b-GA for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:58:58 -0500 Message-ID: <49C93B87.40607@dls.net> Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 14:59:03 -0500 From: "Mike (mwester)" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.21) Gecko/20090302 Thunderbird/2.0.0.21 Mnenhy/0.7.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org References: <1237885606.5348.8.camel@dax.rpnet.com> In-Reply-To: Subject: Re: Package Maintenance X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 20:00:32 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Frans Meulenbroeks wrote: > Disadvantage of a Maintainers file is that it is yet another file to > update when you create a package (adjacent to the checksums file and > of course the package recipe). Guess it will be forgotten regularly. > > Also I fear we're going to end up with a lot of orphaned packages. Is lack of a Maintainers file _really_ our problem? IMO, our current issue is what I would term "Drive-by Commits" (for example, the past two weekends have seen commits that have introduced major breakage of some sort where the committer has not been about for some fairly significant period of time. I don't think listing a name in a Maintainers file is going to change anything, frankly. Mike (mwester)