Re: about unique maintainer address policy
ydirson@a2points.com (Yann Dirson) wrote on 28.01.98 in <[🔎] 199801282159.WAA04963@ppp37.a2points.com>:
> Ben Pfaff writes:
> > - change the current DB schema to be able to store different
> > "Maintainer:" email addresses for each person
> >
> > This is the best solution IMHO. It is more flexible and doesn't force
> > adoption of a single e-mail address.
>
> It seems solution #3 (registering full name, not email address)
> doesn't force it either. I think it would be better. Probably
> solution #1 (the one you advocate) will just make the DB bigger, not
> gaining much.
Well, until you get a case of two people with the same full name. Sooner
or later, it will happen.
> > Although I myself only use a
> > single address, I respect the reasons of people, such as Ian Jackson,
> > who use multiple addresses to filter e-mail.
>
> So do I.
Hmm. I do use multiple addresses, much like Ian said he does. I haven't
yet found a reason to use different maintainer addresses.
Well, maybe if I ever get a hugely popular package that everyone wants to
talk to me about.
Anyway, as long as using multiple addresses serves a useful purpose
(according to whoever does it), I suppose we should support it. For cases
where there is no system behind it, however, it probably still should not
be done. But I don't know a good way to word that for policy.
MfG Kai
Reply to: