There is also a list on https://trac.macports.org/wiki/MacPortsDevelopers
I'll probably do the ones from there if nobody beats me to it. Sent from my iPhone... > On Feb 11, 2017, at 15:05, Mojca Miklavec <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 11 February 2017 at 23:25, Ryan Schmidt wrote: >>> On Feb 11, 2017, at 13:14, Mojca Miklavec wrote: >>>> On 11 February 2017 at 20:05, Jeremy Huddleston Sequoia wrote: >>>> Do we have a mapping list somewhere, so we can just script this for known >>>> mappings? >>> >>> The list should be available on our Trac (at least for those who >>> logged in with their github account). >> >> I assumed such a list would only be visible to our Trac sysadmins. Can it be >> seen by anyone logging in to Trac? If so, how? > > Yes and no. One cannot get a list directly, but one can just enter the > email in the CC field and it will suggest you which username belongs > to that email. We don't have a list of all emails either, but that > could be assembled from Portfiles without too much hassle and looked > up one-by-one or scripted if someone really insisted. > > I've been using that workaround to figure out whom to @mention on > various pull requests. > > I don't know if there are any security implications (provided that > emails are public in Portfiles already). But probably this reveals > emails from any GitHub user that ever logged in to our Trac as well, > not just those of maintainers. > > The old trac would hide full email addresses. Anyone logged in as > committer would see full emails, I'm not sure if random newbies would > also see full emails before the transition. I guess they do now. > > My idea would be to get the "official list" from the sysadmins and do > auto-replacement for all ports at the same time. Waiting for > individual committers to do the changes will take forever and just > means a lot of manual work + hundreds of commits (or hundreds of pull > requests to be merged manually from maintainers without commit > rights). Not to even mention all the typos, forgotten ports etc. (For > that reason I would be in favour of keeping a single obfuscated list > somewhere rather than duplicating all entries all over the place. > Duplication is acceptable, but I really don't like manual work.) > > Mojca
