[gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February

[gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1935 bytes --]

Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
>> It would but having some kind of deadline after which you are for
>> example free to take over the package if you want to would be nice.
> 
> That's going too far; there's certainly no need to take over a package
> just to get a fix in.  If you want to take over a package, asking the
> current maintainer has to be the first step, not to quietly wait for a
> timeout then just grab it.  Similarly asking the current maintainer if
> they mind you putting a fix in.

That's of course a given.  I think the question here relates to
non-responsive maintainers or herds.  I have been in the situation many
many times with gcc-porting where I file a bug with a simple patch (say
removing extra qualification) to get a package to build with GCC 4.1,
and get no response for months from the maintainer despite multiple
pings.  In that case, i'll apply the fix myself.  I always try to wait a
month or more before going ahead and always ping at least once.  So far
i've not received any major complaints, but i'm just waiting for the day
someone will get territorial about their packages and decide rip me a
new one.  It'd be nice to have some kind of asshole insurance.

This also affects things like treecleaners.  How long does a herd team
or maintainer have to be unresponsive to warrant the package falling
into maintainer-needed?  Right now the most common way we find these
packages is when Jakub gets annoyed enough with the accumulating bugs
and lack of response to CC us. ;P

I personally think that for bug fixes a month is a long enough wait to
allow someone to respond.  Keep in mind that's to respond, not to fix
the bug.  A simple "yep, i'll get to this later" is enough.


-- 
                                        by design, by neglect
dirtyepic gentoo org            for a fact or just for effect
9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB3 5B2D E625 A073 8379 37E8 (0x837937E8)


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February

[Kevin F. Quinn]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2520 bytes --]

On Sat, 03 Feb 2007 14:04:49 -0600
Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
> >> It would but having some kind of deadline after which you are for
> >> example free to take over the package if you want to would be nice.
> > 
> > That's going too far; there's certainly no need to take over a
> > package just to get a fix in.  If you want to take over a package,
> > asking the current maintainer has to be the first step, not to
> > quietly wait for a timeout then just grab it.  Similarly asking the
> > current maintainer if they mind you putting a fix in.
> 
> That's of course a given.  I think the question here relates to
> non-responsive maintainers or herds.

Well, this thread didn't start with MIA devs (which is what you're
talking about), it started with devs being too slow to take action.

I wouldn't have a standard timeout (far too regulatory) - just apply
common sense and do what needs to be done.

> I have been in the situation
> many many times with gcc-porting where I file a bug with a simple
> patch (say removing extra qualification) to get a package to build
> with GCC 4.1, and get no response for months from the maintainer
> despite multiple pings.  In that case, i'll apply the fix myself. I
> always try to wait a month or more before going ahead and always ping
> at least once.  So far i've not received any major complaints, but
> i'm just waiting for the day someone will get territorial about their
> packages and decide rip me a new one.  It'd be nice to have some kind
> of asshole insurance.

Well, my experience so far has been that provided you fix stuff
decently (both technically and politically ;) ), people don't mind
Maintainers can always tweak later if they prefer a different
solution.  If things get antsy, there's always devrel to mediate.

One obvious point, is to check a dev's away status if they're not
responding, before diving in.

> This also affects things like treecleaners.  How long does a herd team
> or maintainer have to be unresponsive to warrant the package falling
> into maintainer-needed?  Right now the most common way we find these
> packages is when Jakub gets annoyed enough with the accumulating bugs
> and lack of response to CC us. ;P
> 
> I personally think that for bug fixes a month is a long enough wait to
> allow someone to respond.  Keep in mind that's to respond, not to fix
> the bug.  A simple "yep, i'll get to this later" is enough.

-- 
Kevin F. Quinn

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 641 bytes --]

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> This is your monthly friendly reminder !  Same bat time (typically the
> 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
> irc.freenode.net) !

Reply-to and SPF docs?  Isn't this the third month now?

Also the infra doc on dev email still says not to use d.g.o as a relay
server.  I can't remember if this was first brought up in a council
meeting or on core though.  Just a friendly poke. ;)

-- 
                                        by design, by neglect
dirtyepic gentoo org            for a fact or just for effect
9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB3 5B2D E625 A073 8379 37E8 (0x837937E8)


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 378 bytes --]

On Monday 05 February 2007, Ryan Hill wrote:
> Reply-to and SPF docs?  Isn't this the third month now?

I might be counting wrong, as last time I wasn't there, but it might be the 
fourth, counting the original one.

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://farragut.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org/
Gentoo/Alt lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Sound, ALSA, PAM, KDE, CJK, Ruby ...

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 450 bytes --]

On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 01:06 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
> Reply-to

I've already completed this, I just haven't figured out exactly where it
needs to be committed.  I'm guessing somewhere in the developer
handbook.  Anyway, where should I send this so it'll be done?  File a
bug?

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strategic Lead
Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams
Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee
Gentoo Foundation

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 400 bytes --]

On Monday 05 February 2007, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 01:06 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote:
> > Reply-to
>
> I've already completed this, I just haven't figured out exactly where it
> needs to be committed.  I'm guessing somewhere in the developer
> handbook.  Anyway, where should I send this so it'll be done?  File a
> bug?

would it be more appropriate in the infra project ?
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February

[Mike Frysinger]

This is your monthly friendly reminder !  Same bat time (typically
the 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel
(#gentoo-council @ irc.freenode.net) !

If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
vote on, let us know !  Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole
Gentoo dev list to see.

Keep in mind that every GLEP *re*submission to the council for review
must first be sent to the gentoo-dev mailing list 7 days (minimum)
before being submitted as an agenda item which itself occurs 7 days
before the meeting.  Simply put, the gentoo-dev mailing list must be
notified at least 14 days before the meeting itself.

For more info on the Gentoo Council, feel free to browse our homepage:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February

[Tiziano Müller]

Mike Frysinger wrote:

> This is your monthly friendly reminder !  Same bat time (typically
> the 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel
> (#gentoo-council @ irc.freenode.net) !
> 
> If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
> vote on, let us know !  Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole
> Gentoo dev list to see.

GLEP46, as discussed on Januar 21-24.
I'd say it's ready. The only minor thing is where to keep the list of
available tags. As far as I understood neysx we should keep it in
metadata.dtd itself.

Cheers,
Tiziano

-- 
Tiziano Müller
Gentoo Linux Developer
Areas of responsibility: Samba, PostgreSQL, cpp, Python
E-Mail     : dev-zero@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP   : F327 283A E769 2E36 18D5  4DE2 1B05 6A63 AE9C 1E30


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 447 bytes --]

On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 19:59 +0100, Tiziano Müller wrote:
> GLEP46, as discussed on Januar 21-24.
> I'd say it's ready. The only minor thing is where to keep the list of
> available tags. As far as I understood neysx we should keep it in
> metadata.dtd itself.

http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0046.html for anybody wanting to
know what GLEP49 entails.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strategic Lead
Games Developer

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]