From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org)
by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1EESWk-0006zW-TY
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2005 14:09:51 +0000
Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8BE50MC010282;
Sun, 11 Sep 2005 14:05:00 GMT
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30])
by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8BE37uQ031731
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 11 Sep 2005 14:03:08 GMT
Received: from rwcrmhc14.comcast.net ([204.127.198.54] helo=rwcrmhc12.comcast.net)
by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
id 1EESLm-0005RR-JV
for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2005 13:58:30 +0000
Received: from [192.168.2.101] (pcp09895245pcs.ewndsr01.nj.comcast.net[68.36.161.94])
by comcast.net (rwcrmhc14) with SMTP
id <2005091113583001400f954ve>; Sun, 11 Sep 2005 13:58:30 +0000
Subject: [gentoo-dev] ROX: maintainer-wanted and apps out of date
From: Peter Hyman <pete4abw@comcast.net>
To: Gentoo Mail Lists <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Organization: PAH
Date: Sun, 11 Sep 2005 09:58:30 -0400
Message-Id: <1126447110.10560.13.camel@localhost>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: aada2962-5ec5-45b8-875a-6d1045c1a4e2
X-Archives-Hash: ef23a40d1a8d0c2f21b4f022c247ae1b
Several core ROX programs are out of date.
Rox bug # 102228
Rox-lib bug # 79333
Rox-clib bug # 78309
Despite the above bug reports, and copies to the current listed
maintainers, the products are not being updated.
Rox is among the easiest programs to maintain, and many ebuilds simply
need to be renamed in order to work.
In addition, I and others have contributed ebuilds for consideration,
and they continue to languish or are assigned to the maintainer-wanted
alias. I have offered to produce ebuilds for review and submission. I
was told I needed to become a developer. While I would be happy to take
on the responsibility, I don't see why it would be necessary. The
ebuilds are already there for you. Just search ROX in bugzilla. I don't
need my name on it. However, I do feel strongly that if you are going to
offer a package suite in portage, you have an obligation to keep it
current -- ESPECIALLY when the user community is doing the work already.
No one is asking for any special work to be done -- just that bugs are
responded to and handled.
I do not know what happened to the listed rox maintainers, svyatogor and
lanius or why they are not updating rox.
I was wondering what it will take to have the portage tree updated. With
the two libraries noted above, they are blockers to some of the rox
applications and really need to be resolved.
At least have the rox bugs reviewed and cleared out. Most of the ebuilds
have already been submitted and are being used. They deserve to be
placed in portage.
--
Peter
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list