I’m also in support of it. In case nobody else chimes in with an objection, I’ll commit it this weekend.
Thanks everyone for the discussion. On Sun, Jan 31, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Tianon Gravi <[email protected]> wrote: > On 31 January 2016 at 00:01, Dmitry Smirnov <[email protected]> wrote: > > Though it would be nice if anyone else say "OK" for this proposal. I feel > > uncomfortable that nobody supported it and silence can't be interpreted > as an > > agreement. > > I had voiced my own +1 on the pkg-golang-devel thread [1]; I should've > re-voiced it when the post was moved to a more appropriate list. > > I'm a member of DPMT (who uses this method) and find that it works > very well there. The packages that need a little tighter control have > an individual in "Maintainer:" instead of the team, but otherwise > "team maintenance" really does apply. > > [1]: > https://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-golang-devel/Week-of-Mon-20151228/000196.html > > ♥, > - Tianon > 4096R / B42F 6819 007F 00F8 8E36 4FD4 036A 9C25 BF35 7DD4 > -- Best regards, Michael
_______________________________________________ Pkg-go-maintainers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-go-maintainers
