On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 11:33 AM, Xavier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 4:25 PM, Daenyth Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Regardless of what it once was, I think the current method is silly >> and needlessly confusing. Contributor should be there to credit the >> previous handlers for a package. Maintainer should just be the person >> who is currently in charge of keeping it working, whether binary or >> otherwise. Pacman's "Packager" data is kept for the binary files, >> making the current use of Maintainer redundant. >> >> I think it should be changed to the more logical way. Anyone else have >> an opinion on that? >> > > +1
+2
