Re: Looking for testers for curl - PR 283266

Michael Gmelin wrote:
>> On 20. Dec 2024, at 00:18, Daniel Engberg 
>> <daniel.engberg.lists@pyret.net> wrote:
>> "...which is why assigning it to a group is likely a better idea for 
>> some ports such as this one."
> 
> That depends on the group. I honestly don’t know who’s in desktop@ (I 
> couldn’t figure it out googling for 60 seconds, so maybe there is a 
> record somewhere and I’m too lazy).
> 
> Having someone actually responsible sometimes works better than a group, 
> unless that group provides sufficient transparency. I don’t see that 
> sunpoet has failed us as the maintainer for this port and it doesn’t 
> seem like you discussed it with them in a genuine way. So maybe that 
> would be a first step, even if it means spending time and effort on that 
> human interaction.
> 
I already said this on the PR, but reiterating that as a desktop@ member 
I am opposed to this transfer without explicit consent by the current 
maintainer who is an active committer, regardless of timeout.
> Besides that, as someone else already pointed out, desktop@ doesn’t seem 
> like an obvious choice to me.
> 
There are a couple of ports that aren't obviously in desktop@'s purview 
but list the team as the maintainer because their first uses were to 
support desktop@ software builds and development.

-- 
Charlie Li
...nope, still don't have an exit line.