Ability for maintainers to update own ports
eikemeier at fillmore-labs.com
Tue Nov 11 03:00:04 PST 2003
Mark Linimon wrote:
>>- and the wish for more QA in the PR database, i.e. documented procedures
>> how and in which timeframe a PR is handled.
> And what should happen when it isn't? Remember, you're herding cats
> (volunteers), here. Who will volunteer to be the authority in case of
> disputes? (Not me, sorry, I'm already booked solid...)
QA is not necessarily about fixed time frames. You *can* document every
procedure you want, and even an infinite timeframe is a timeframe. The
point is that submitters (customers) have a dependable system to work with.
isn't a bad start. The rule here is "takes interest", so I, as a submitter
know that I have to produce interesting PRs :) Sounds silly, but read the
last sentence a second time: It's a rule we play by.
Next would be
(I know that this isn't meant to describe the ports tree) and a little of
See, we are all playing the same game here, and we need a captain for that.
It's far better if all people play by the second (or third) best strategy than
everyone playing by a different one, of course the best in his own mind.
Even cats have rules ;-)
More information about the freebsd-ports