From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20297 invoked from network); 21 May 2004 15:55:46 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by parrot.ussg.indiana.edu with SMTP; 21 May 2004 15:55:46 +0000 Received: from parrot.ussg.indiana.edu ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BRC2d-0000gn-FH for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Fri, 21 May 2004 15:34:40 +0000 Received: (qmail 8610 invoked by uid 89); 21 May 2004 15:34:34 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 28454 invoked from network); 21 May 2004 15:34:34 +0000 From: Jason Stubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 00:32:07 +0900 User-Agent: KMail/1.6.2 References: <200405201846.37173.cbrewer@stealthaccess.net> <1085146797.25036.52.camel@localhost> <200405211554.06946.c.j.bainbridge@ed.ac.uk> In-Reply-To: <200405211554.06946.c.j.bainbridge@ed.ac.uk> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <200405220032.07816.jstubbs@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Stuff that makes people mad X-Archives-Salt: b8a6ee9a-b603-460f-8163-4db7734145de X-Archives-Hash: a41f050baf60e801455ba04476aa77c3 =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Friday 21 May 2004 23:54, Chris Bainbridge wrote: > On Friday 21 May 2004 14:39, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > > Can we remove the NEED for a maintainer? > > > > Definitely not. =A0If we were to do something so asinine, we would end = up > > with packages that are grossly out of date with no hope of them ever > > being updated. =A0There would also be nobody responsible for that ebuil= d, > > so there would be nobody liable if something were to go wrong with it. > > All in all, it is a very bad idea. > > One of the things that seems to annoy lots of people is this idea that > their ebuilds are being ignored. I've usually got a bunch (8 at the momen= t) > of ebuilds in bugs.gentoo waiting to be processed.. the oldest is almost a > year old now. You're not the first. > There ought to be some sort of procedure for dealing with user submitted= =20 > ebuilds.=20 (^^^ he said the magic word 'procedure' :O) > I would suggest a system of putting them in ~x86 (or whatever) immediatel= y,=20 > and if there are no bug reports for x days move them to x86.=20 > > All of this could be easily automated... the idea that every package needs > a maintainer is something that comes from Debian, and is imho unnecessary. Personally, I think every package does need a maintainer. I think that if y= ou=20 want to equate Gentoo with any community driven *NIX derivative, you should= =20 look at FreeBSD. Every package has a maintainer, but the maintainer is not= =20 necessarily part of the elite few that maintain the base system. > You end up with a few problems: a limited number of maintainers with > limited package interests and a lack of time to devote, and an alienated > developer community who have no way to bug fix or add new ebuilds without > going through the single developer. No developer in Gentoo really takes on more than he/she is able to handle=20 because they know what they're responsibilities are. > When that developers interests shift (as they invariably do), updates to = the=20 > package become ignored, and once again the developer community can do=20 > nothing to fix this as the power rests with the maintainer. =20 A developer becomes a dev when the recruiting developer is sure that the ne= w=20 dev is in it for the long haul. I do not do any ebuild maintenance at this= =20 stage, but you can be sure that I was fully warned to take full=20 responsibility for any package I add to the tree for as long as I am part o= f=20 this project. If I leave? Well, you must have seen the recruitment posts... > There is no need to be defensive and start saying things like "if you don= 't > like it this way then fork away.." when the desire of the complainer is to > improve gentoo, not start/join another project. I don't believe "fork away" was Chris' intended message. I think it was, "i= f=20 you don't like things, then lend a helping hand". If your hand is not=20 received, then go to the ombudsman. bmg ebuilds are not part of the tree, n= ot=20 because the developers are disliked or that the ebuilds are not necessarily= =20 up to QA but, because of an apparent lack of commitment. My point? Well, you're saying that Gentoo needs new procedures - what=20 procedures do you have to offer? I, too, feel that the ebuild development=20 needs to be opened wider. However, the are many issues to be dealt with:=20 quality, infrastructure, maintenance... If you (or anybody) can propose a set of procedures to deal with all these= =20 issues, I'm sure that they will be received with honest criticism at minimu= m.=20 Complainers do not add any value. Regards, Jason Stubbs =2D----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iQCVAwUBQK4g91oikN4/5jfsAQK9UAP/ee10aBhmvO+98OwJeaNpTx7DBDPC+ank aB1EZbgwHzp/KiLuSFWzF5ss98795KEKdeP/wOlPvF86fDIs4zLJkBKuJ3V56rHa lv7FrfHUY5xRmZN/JatCPYd5b4UUWseFuWr6DuQXoCoKTDe9n1kmIHmGzqSI8omF oeCYxyANwrQ=3D =3DWOZD =2D----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list