[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Simplify non-responsive maintainers policy Part 2



On Thursday, 22 October 2009 at 00:07, Tom Lane wrote:
> Lyos Gemini Norezel <lyos gemininorezel gmail com> writes:
> > Why not just require a secondary email address?
> 
> "Require" a secondary email address?  Not everyone has one, or wants
> to hand it over if they do.  That sounds more like a recipe for driving
> maintainers away than making sure you can contact them.

How about: Maintainers should provide a secondary e-mail address if their
primary address is supplied by their current employer.

Regards,
R.

-- 
Fedora http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Rathann
RPMFusion http://rpmfusion.org | MPlayer http://mplayerhq.hu
"Faith manages."
        -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations"


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]