[gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[Mark Loeser]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 538 bytes --]

dev-util/cccc is not depended on by any other applications, the stable
version does not compile, and while upstream has newer releases which most
likely work...there is no Gentoo maintainer (bug #128109).  If no one steps
up to maintain it in 30 days, I will be removing it.

-- 
Mark Loeser   -   Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email         -   halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
                  mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web           -   http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
                  http://www.halcy0n.com

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[Mike Frysinger]

cccc-3.1.4 now in portage
-mike
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[foser]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 412 bytes --]

On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 02:54 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> cccc-3.1.4 now in portage

Why did you add that, without adding metadata ? That is just wrong.

It is better to remove it if there is no maintainer, you upping it
without adding yourself as maintainer is no form of maintenance. This is
exactly why we get complaints about a stale tree.

I still say it should be removed in 30 days.

- foser

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[Mark Loeser]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 969 bytes --]

foser <foser@gentoo.org> said:
> On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 02:54 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > cccc-3.1.4 now in portage
> 
> Why did you add that, without adding metadata ? That is just wrong.
> 
> It is better to remove it if there is no maintainer, you upping it
> without adding yourself as maintainer is no form of maintenance. This is
> exactly why we get complaints about a stale tree.
> 
> I still say it should be removed in 30 days.

I agree.  There is a lot of stuff that suffers from being unmaintained,
and I think we should strive towards cleaning that up.  It helps no one
if there isn't anyone to claim responsibility for the package when there
is a problem.

Just my 2 cents,

-- 
Mark Loeser   -   Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email         -   halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
                  mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web           -   http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
                  http://www.halcy0n.com

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[Chris Bainbridge]

On 15/04/06, Mark Loeser <halcy0n@gentoo.org> wrote:
> foser <foser@gentoo.org> said:
> > I still say it should be removed in 30 days.
>
> I agree.  There is a lot of stuff that suffers from being unmaintained,
> and I think we should strive towards cleaning that up.  It helps no one
> if there isn't anyone to claim responsibility for the package when there
> is a problem.

This discussion comes up every six months or so. See
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/32484 for the
beginnings of a list of unmaintained packages...

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[Mike Frysinger]

On Saturday 15 April 2006 12:07, Mark Loeser wrote:
> I agree.  There is a lot of stuff that suffers from being unmaintained,
> and I think we should strive towards cleaning that up.  It helps no one
> if there isn't anyone to claim responsibility for the package when there
> is a problem.

and it helps no one to go around cutting packages that have no outstanding 
issues with them

there was an outstanding issue with cccc, but i resolved that
-mike
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[foser]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 777 bytes --]

On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 14:24 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> and it helps no one to go around cutting packages that have no outstanding 
> issues with them

Sure it helps keep Gentoo clean and up-to-date, the load of packages
that are outdated are often unmaintained as well. The one leads to the
other. Anyway, nobody would know about outstanding issues that popped
up, because there is no maintainer to assign them to.

> there was an outstanding issue with cccc, but i resolved that

How do you know you resolved it, you don't get bugreports on it do you ?
I mean, you aren't the maintainer. And there is still the outstanding
issue that it is unmaintained in Gentoo, are you going to fix that or
not ? Otherwise it should be masked and removed.

- foser



[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[Mike Frysinger]

On Sunday 16 April 2006 11:17, foser wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 14:24 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > and it helps no one to go around cutting packages that have no
> > outstanding issues with them
>
> Sure it helps keep Gentoo clean and up-to-date, the load of packages
> that are outdated are often unmaintained as well. The one leads to the
> other. Anyway, nobody would know about outstanding issues that popped
> up, because there is no maintainer to assign them to.

and then people send out last-rites notices in those cases

> > there was an outstanding issue with cccc, but i resolved that
>
> How do you know you resolved it, you don't get bugreports on it do you ?

well the logical thing would be to go to bugzilla and search for "cccc" ... 
and guess what ?  no more open bug reports

> I mean, you aren't the maintainer. And there is still the outstanding
> issue that it is unmaintained in Gentoo, are you going to fix that or
> not ? Otherwise it should be masked and removed.

this is the same argument as already made and rejected ... feel free to mask 
and remove the hundreds of other packages that have no maintainer
-mike
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[foser]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1143 bytes --]

On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 16:42 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> well the logical thing would be to go to bugzilla and search for "cccc" ... 
> and guess what ?  no more open bug reports

I already did that when I wrote it, actually there still is an open bug
for it. So I guess you didn't actually go trough these proposed steps
yourself. Anyway, it is completely besides the point, because you or
anyone else won't check a week or a month from now if there's bug filed
against cccc, that is what maintenance is about.

> > I mean, you aren't the maintainer. And there is still the outstanding
> > issue that it is unmaintained in Gentoo, are you going to fix that or
> > not ? Otherwise it should be masked and removed.
> 
> this is the same argument as already made and rejected ... 

Where was this rejected and by whom ? By you I guess ? That just doesn't
cut it, errors made in the past are no reason to make them again in the
future.

> feel free to mask 
> and remove the hundreds of other packages that have no maintainer

So now we do have your blessing ? cccc is then up for removal as of this
moment.

- foser

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[Chris Bainbridge]

On 18/04/06, foser <foser@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 16:42 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > well the logical thing would be to go to bugzilla and search for "cccc" ...
> > and guess what ?  no more open bug reports
>
> I already did that when I wrote it, actually there still is an open bug
> for it. So I guess you didn't actually go trough these proposed steps
> yourself. Anyway, it is completely besides the point, because you or
> anyone else won't check a week or a month from now if there's bug filed
> against cccc, that is what maintenance is about.

Are you suggesting that all packages with long standing open bug
reports should be removed? There are thousands that fit that
description. If not, then what is your definition of "maintained"? It
could be argued that since Mike fixed the cccc bug, it is maintained,
even though he isn't the maintainer. Likewise, there are hundreds of
packages that have a maintainer listed, or are assigned to a herd,
where bug reports are essentially ignored. Should those also be
removed?

> > > I mean, you aren't the maintainer. And there is still the outstanding
> > > issue that it is unmaintained in Gentoo, are you going to fix that or
> > > not ? Otherwise it should be masked and removed.
> >
> > this is the same argument as already made and rejected ...
>
> Where was this rejected and by whom ? By you I guess ? That just doesn't
> cut it, errors made in the past are no reason to make them again in the
> future.

Did you read the previous discussion link I provided? The argument has
been rejected in the past because it would lead to hundreds of
otherwise working packages being removed.

> > feel free to mask
> > and remove the hundreds of other packages that have no maintainer
>
> So now we do have your blessing ? cccc is then up for removal as of this
> moment.

Maybe you aren't a native English speaker; it was clear from Mike's
post that he would rather you didn't go ahead with removing hundreds
of packages.

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[foser]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1738 bytes --]

On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 14:11 +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> Are you suggesting that all packages with long standing open bug
> reports should be removed? There are thousands that fit that
> description. If not, then what is your definition of "maintained"? It
> could be argued that since Mike fixed the cccc bug, it is maintained,
> even though he isn't the maintainer. Likewise, there are hundreds of
> packages that have a maintainer listed, or are assigned to a herd,
> where bug reports are essentially ignored. Should those also be
> removed?

No, I don't know why you jump to that conclusion. There are people
responsible there, you can contact them if you feel things are ignored.
Or better, you can try and help out on those outstanding bugs and solve
them, so the maintainers would only need to apply a fix.

> Did you read the previous discussion link I provided? The argument has
> been rejected in the past because it would lead to hundreds of
> otherwise working packages being removed.

You get a lot more out of that thread than I do, I guess it's a matter
of interpretation. 

> Maybe you aren't a native English speaker; it was clear from Mike's
> post that he would rather you didn't go ahead with removing hundreds
> of packages.

I don't know how this relates to my mother tongue, but I'm not speaking
of a mass removal or anything. You make it into that all the time, maybe
you should let go of that mindset. I think that if we come across cases
like this the goal should be to clear up the confusion. Either find a
maintainer or clean it out. That way eventually 'hundreds' becomes
'dozens' of unmaintained packages and maybe some day even less, it's a
gradual process.

- foser

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[Mike Frysinger]

On Tuesday 18 April 2006 09:51, foser wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 14:11 +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> > Maybe you aren't a native English speaker; it was clear from Mike's
> > post that he would rather you didn't go ahead with removing hundreds
> > of packages.
>
> I don't know how this relates to my mother tongue, but I'm not speaking
> of a mass removal or anything.   You make it into that all the time, maybe
> you should let go of that mindset. 

either you have a policy of cutting unmaintained packages or you dont ... you 
cant have some vague middle ground
-mike
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[foser]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 500 bytes --]

On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 10:22 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> either you have a policy of cutting unmaintained packages or you dont ... you 
> cant have some vague middle ground

Hide behind policy if you can't do it with common sense. The policy is
to add valid metadata.xml data to packages that do not have it, that has
not been done here. Adding 'maintainer-needed' (or 'no-herd') as a way
out is not sufficient and was never intended policy when metadata/herds
got introduced.

- foser 

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[Mike Frysinger]

On Tuesday 18 April 2006 10:41, foser wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 10:22 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > either you have a policy of cutting unmaintained packages or you dont ...
> > you cant have some vague middle ground
>
> Hide behind policy if you can't do it with common sense.

dont know what policy you're referring to seeing as how we dont have any 
concerning unmaintained packages

common sense says leave the package along if there are no open issues

> The policy is to add valid metadata.xml data to packages that do not have
> it

sure, for new packages ... cccc isnt a new package
-mike
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[foser]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 505 bytes --]

On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 10:53 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> dont know what policy you're referring to seeing as how we dont have any 
> concerning unmaintained packages

Still hiding... c'mon you are better than this.

> sure, for new packages ... cccc isnt a new package

The policy concerning metadata makes no difference between
new/(un)maintained. It just says that every package should have one. So
if you come across a pack that doesn't and you touch it, you need to fix
that.

- foser

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[Philippe Trottier]

foser wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 10:22 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> 
>>either you have a policy of cutting unmaintained packages or you dont ... you 
>>cant have some vague middle ground
> 
> 
> Hide behind policy if you can't do it with common sense. The policy is
> to add valid metadata.xml data to packages that do not have it, that has
> not been done here. Adding 'maintainer-needed' (or 'no-herd') as a way
> out is not sufficient and was never intended policy when metadata/herds
> got introduced.
> 
> - foser 

If no one has an objection, I'll pick up that package, I think it is fun, never 
tought I'd use it, but I have so much code written I'd like how much I have 
really done.

If there is no objection I'll make the update needed, create metadata, make 
repoman happy.

Phil
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[foser]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 373 bytes --]

On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 17:56 +0300, Philippe Trottier wrote:
> If no one has an objection, I'll pick up that package, I think it is fun, never 
> tought I'd use it, but I have so much code written I'd like how much I have 
> really done.
> 
> If there is no objection I'll make the update needed, create metadata, make 
> repoman happy.

Go right ahead.

- foser

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[Philippe Trottier]

foser wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 17:56 +0300, Philippe Trottier wrote:
> 
>>If no one has an objection, I'll pick up that package, I think it is fun, never 
>>tought I'd use it, but I have so much code written I'd like how much I have 
>>really done.
>>
>>If there is no objection I'll make the update needed, create metadata, make 
>>repoman happy.
> 
> 
> Go right ahead.
> 
> - foser

CVS commit complete.
RepoMan sez: "If everyone were like you, I'd be out of business!"

Phil
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[Mike Frysinger]

On Tuesday 18 April 2006 07:00, foser wrote:
> On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 16:42 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > well the logical thing would be to go to bugzilla and search for "cccc"
> > ... and guess what ?  no more open bug reports
>
> I already did that when I wrote it, actually there still is an open bug
> for it.

the open bug is about porting it to OS X ... those porting bugs dont count as 
the OS X team resolves them, not the maintainers

you'll find a ton of other such bugs which maintainers dont care or want to 
hear about the issues
-mike
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list