Re: lightdm maintainership
- Reply: Guido Falsi via desktop : "Re: lightdm maintainership"
- In reply to: Guido Falsi via desktop : "lightdm maintainership"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 15:09:44 UTC
Moin moin In my mind members of xfce@ implying you, are members of desktop@. So feel free to assign it to desktop@ and simply committing to it :) I would love to see some more people commit under the desktop@ hat. mfg Tobias On Sun, 23 May 2021 at 21:53, Guido Falsi via desktop <desktop@freebsd.org> wrote: > > Hi all! > > Recently maintainership for lightdm ports has been put back to the pool > for personal reasons. > > I am keeping the xfce ports updated it is an optional dependency of the > xfce port and a common choice for a display manager. In fact it is what > I usually suggest if asked about it. > > I have been thinking of taking maintainership as myself or as xfce@ for > x11/lightdm and x11/lightdm-gtk-greeter since I use them and they are a > common choice for xfce and I use them. > > Before doing this I thought, since I bet they are a common choice for > other desktop environment users as well, if it would be more appropriate > to assign them to desktop@. Any thought on this? > > Also I can't remember rules for implicit approval to desktop@maintainer > ports. Are people from kde@ xfce@ gnome@ (etc.) automatically included? > > -- > Guido Falsi <mad@madpilot.net> >