Move ownership to community about ipaddress

[DiogoAndre]

I don't think the author is missing. He has responded to issues in the recent past, maybe he's just not as active as you wished.

If you're not happy with the way this project is being handled you can just fork it and make it your own.

That abuse report was totally unnecessary.

[t3hk0d3]

@DiogoAndre
there is lots of PRs and issues ignored. Some PRs hanging for years.

He has responded to issues in the recent past, maybe he's just not as active as you wished.

@bluemonk github activity is empty for few months.

If you're not happy with the way this project is being handled you can just fork it and make it your own.
That abuse report was totally unnecessary.

I think gem should be actively maintained, because i use it in my projects.

I am not happy with issues being ignored and PRs contributors time being wasted.

@mikemackintosh doing his best, but i think he doesn't have ability push into repository.

[jmehnle]

@t3hk0d3, this issue report is not constructive, just complaining. Please stop it. Just fork the gem and be done with it.

[t3hk0d3]

@jmehnle Its constructive.
I think @bluemonk just should move repository into organization, and let initiative people like @mikemackintosh accept PRs and commit into repo.

Otherwise this is just another dead unmaintained gem.
There is should be single upstream to collect all positive changes, not shitload of forks.

[bluemonk]

Mike already has full access to the github repo. He has been accepting PRs
since a while now, or am I missing something?

On Fri, Apr 17, 2015 at 6:11 PM, Igor Yamolov [email protected]
wrote:

@jmehnle https://github.com/jmehnle Its constructive.
I think @bluemonk https://github.com/bluemonk just should move
repository into organization, and let initiative people like
@mikemackintosh https://github.com/mikemackintosh accept PRs.

Otherwise this is just another dead unmaintained gem.
There is should be single upstream to collect all positive changes, not
shitload of forks.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#63 (comment).

[t3hk0d3]

@bluemonk well, it fine than.

[mikemackintosh]

I think the general concern is around the actual built gem. We have the ability to manage the repo, but the gem itself is unmanaged on rubygems.

[t3hk0d3]

@mikemackintosh that was reason why i've created abuse on rubygems.
However @bluemonk promised to give you access to rubygems.

[DiogoAndre]

I see.. makes sense. It isn't complicated to add another owner to the Gem on Rubygems. gem owner command

Maybe @bluemonk can add @mikemackintosh, and we'll all be happy. 😄

[bf4]

FYI, y'all rubygems/rubygems.org#725 and rails-girls-summer-of-code/projects#31

There's work-in-progress to make adding gem owners easier. Github repo ownership is never the blocker in this context. Not having it is just inconvenient, as others have noted. One may still fork.