Number of maintainers vs. number of ports

[Frank Laszlo]

Conor McDermottroe wrote:
> On Tue, May 23, 2006 at 09:18:58AM -0400, Frank Laszlo wrote:
>   
>> Conor McDermottroe wrote:
>>     
>>> On Mon, May 22, 2006 at 09:25:28PM -0400, Kris Kennaway wrote:
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> Nevertheless, I'd still like to see more maintaine{rs,d ports}.  We
>>>> now have a nice document about "what it means to be a maintainer", so
>>>> I think we should start doing some outreach to bring new people in.
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> Perhaps we should encourage users to look at the ports they have
>>> installed that are unmaintained and think about volunteering to maintain
>>> them?
>>>
>>> A script similar to the one below may be helpful (apologies in advance
>>> if my shell-fu is weak). When I ran it, it surprised me to see that
>>> ports like lang/ruby18 and misc/compat5x are unmaintained. (Oh, for the
>>> time...)
>>>       
> -- SNIP SCRIPT --
>   
>> The INDEX file is really better suited for such things. Heres a quick
>> example.
>>     
> -- SNIP SCRIPT --
>
> True, if you want to see all of the unmaintained ports. I was aiming at
> showing people only the ports /they have installed/ that are
> unmaintained. I don't expect people to adopt ports that they don't even
> use themselves. :-)
>
> -C
>
>   

Ahh, good point! I still think that the INDEX file would be better than
doing `make -V MAINTAINER` for the ports though. :)

-Frank