[Mageia-dev] Contributors using real name/working email? or?not? or maybe?

Fri Mar 4 19:58:08 CET 2011

Op vrijdag 04 maart 2011 19:52:27 schreef nicolas vigier:
+> On Fri, 04 Mar 2011, Maarten Vanraes wrote:
+> > Op donderdag 03 maart 2011 22:58:16 schreef nicolas vigier:
+> > > On Thu, 03 Mar 2011, Maarten Vanraes wrote:
+> > > > Op donderdag 03 maart 2011 22:31:10 schreef Romain d'Alverny:
+> > > > > On Thu, Mar 3, 2011 at 21:54, Frank Griffin <ftg at roadrunner.com> 
+wrote:
+> > > > > > Maarten Vanraes wrote:
+> > > > > >> C. how about we make <packagename>@packages.mageia.org, which
+> > > > > >> could use the maintainers database to forward the email to
+> > > > > >> maintainers (in case of more) (this could also be a
+> > > > > >> packagegroup. eg: firefox at packages.mageia.org could refer to
+> > > > > >> maintainers of firefox, xulrunner, etc...) (this option might
+> > > > > >> just be too complex)
+> > > > > > 
+> > > > > > That is an elegant and excellent idea.
+> > > > > 
+> > > > > Elegant, but as in a changelog, that means the email does not
+> > > > > match/identify/link to the _person_ taking the step of actually
+> > > > > committing/releasing the change, but the team in charge of managing
+> > > > > the package. Is that wanted?
+> > > > > 
+> > > > > Romain
+> > > > 
+> > > > it depends, the nickname could still be kept; and we were talking
+> > > > about having multiple maintainers in the future?
+> > > 
+> > > Except that changelog is not for listing maintainers, but the persons
+> > > who did some changes.
+> > 
+> > re-trying to answer more or less coherent:
+> > 
+> > having "cn" attribute for changelog would be best, imho, but it could be
+> > coupled with the mageia email of the packages(packagegroup). (if that is
+> > wanted, or even a package email could be made if the person in question
+> > wouldn't want to have their own email address on it).
+> 
+> Using a packagegroup email in changelog doesn't make sense at all,
+> changelog is supposed to list the people who made changes, not the
+> maintainer of the package. The complaint against using packager email
+> in changelog was that "it encourages users to contact packagers directly
+> via private email rather than going through the proper support channels".
+> And using a packagegroup email redirected to maintainer doesn't solve
+> that.
+> 
+> So you're proposing a solution that doesn't fix the problem.
+
+well, maybe only indirectly, since the maintainers should be the people who at 
+least (silently) agreed to the change in question.
+
+it often happens someone else makes the change, that is true, and it probably 
+would be easier to have the email of that person instead of only the "cn" 
+field.
+
+> Actually I don't remember receiving any email from users who found my
+> email in a rpm changelog. And if that happens, answering with the URL of
+> bugzilla does not take so much time. So I don't think that's a problem.
+
+i didn't either, but then i didn't commit much.
+