Johannes Winkelmann wrote:
Hey,
I've talked to Jukka regarding proposals sent to clc which are forgotten after some time, and was wondering whether there are opinions regarding a policy to submit proposals which are automatically accepted after a while, if there's a certain amount of acceptance. The procedure I imagine would look like the following:
1. Submit a proposal, e.g. to cvstrac 2a discussion takes place 2b silent agreement (;-)) 4. Adjust proposal, call for vote
5a Interested maintainers vote (-1, 0, +1) there 6. After a certain time (for example 2 weeks), the proposal is either accepted or rejected
I know this sounds very bureaucratic, but IMHO it's worse to make good proposals and be commited to solve existing problems and just being ignored. Please note that this is not at all meant as a criticism, just attempt to cope with reality :-)
Ideas for such proposals are: - define a naming scheme for perl related ports (p5- vs- perl-); from Jukka
the more I hit perl with ports, the more I think perl sucks. I think it's just too easy to hit dependency hell with perl ports. Case and point: spamassassin, in crux terms, I would need something like 10 perl ports. I think this should only be done if it's useful. CPAN seems like a much easier way to install perl-specific things.
- The guidelines about changing other maintainer's Job from Sten - "port of the week"; put up a webpage where extraordinary nice ports are published (no lengthy desciption). I e.g. discovered dnsmasq which I find _very_ handy, easy to use and working fine.
Sounds good. Just ban PYMP from the list, and we'll be fine! :) V