svn commit: r301130 - head/dns/zkt [ID#2012071909000066]

[Eitan Adler]

On 19 July 2012 03:09, Alexey Dokuchaev <danfe at freebsd.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 09:28:28AM +0200, Carlo Strub wrote:
>> 07/19/2012 03:10 - Alexey Dokuchaev wrote:
>> > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:39:17PM +0000, Carlo Strub wrote:
>> > > --- head/dns/zkt/Makefile Wed Jul 18 21:03:43 2012 (r301129)
>> > > +++ head/dns/zkt/Makefile Wed Jul 18 21:39:17 2012 (r301130)
>> > > @@ -1,27 +1,30 @@
>> > >  # New ports collection makefile for:   zkt
>> > >  # Date created:        2008-08-06
>> > > -# Whom:                Frank Behrens <frank+ports at ilse.behrens.de>
>> > > +# Whom:                Frank Behrens
>> >
>> > This header should not be touched.  It reflect the reality when port was
>> > first added, and should normally be made more accurate, not less (e.g. by
>> > adding previously omitted address).
>>
>> If I remember correctly, there was an effort made a few years ago to
>> remove all the mail addresses in the headers to not let users bother port
>> originators but only maintainers if there was a problem.  Is that not the
>> right approach anymore?  I am open for discussion.
>
> I recall someone mentioned this, yes, but 1) this idea is stupid: instead of
> removing bits of historical evidence, we should educate our users where to
> look for correct maintainer address;

We don't lose historical evidence at all and why increase the
cognitive load on the user "which email should I use?" when we could
just remove the need entirely.


-- 
Eitan Adler
Source & Ports committer
X11, Bugbusting teams