failure of policy

[Vivek Khera]

It seems that the change log on freshports for the databases/slony1  
port shows that someone somewhere is confused as to who's the  
maintainer of the port. The Makefile clearly shows it is still me.

On 23 Nov 2006, an update was issued to upgrade the 1.1.5 version to  
1.2.0 which had known errors in it which cause data loss.  Somehow it  
was applied.  A few days later a manual patch was added to work  
around that.  The initial update indicates that whomever submitted  
the port was either claiming to be or was assumed to be the maintainer.

Then on 8 Dec 2006, another update was issued and applied, to 1.2.1.

Today I saw in my email a patch to correct some error in the pkg- 
plist file, which is how I noticed that someone had updated the  
slony1 port.

This is not how it is supposed to work.  I should have gotten these  
notices on *every* PR submitted with a patch against this port.   
There is no reason that 1.2.0 should have *ever* hit the ports tree  
as it was broken out of the gate.  This is one of the reason ports  
have maintainers: to ensure broken things don't get thrown into the  
collection.

If the committers are not going to follow the rules, then why should  
anyone bother to be a maintainer?