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 4.54) id 1Evas6-0004mg-Ps for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:46:11 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id k08Dix9O003257; Sun, 8 Jan 2006 13:44:59 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k08DerPD003061 for ; Sun, 8 Jan 2006 13:40:54 GMT Received: from d226222.adsl.hansenet.de ([80.171.226.222] helo=iglu.bnet.local) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.54) id 1Evamz-0007Eg-6D for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sun, 08 Jan 2006 13:40:53 +0000 From: Carsten Lohrke To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for January Date: Sun, 8 Jan 2006 14:40:47 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.9 References: <200601011053.k01ArjOh019213@robin.gentoo.org> <200601080115.31137.carlo@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2518297.GFo6R0kXVt"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200601081440.52311.carlo@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 3e0dd8db-6689-4387-a92c-08bcff10c98c X-Archives-Hash: 328627fe6f07a9b149e62fda6d17bdce --nextPart2518297.GFo6R0kXVt Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Sunday 08 January 2006 01:35, Stuart Herbert wrote: > I agree that some cleaning is needed (and some of my packages are > desperate for it!), but I'm totally opposed to this idea. I think the > idea of shutting up shop for three months (presumably with a "closed > for refurbishment" sign on the door) would let down our users who rely > on us for regular package updates, and would be a massive PR disaster. > Cleaning is something that has to happen all the time; it needs to be > a natural and sustainable part of what we do every day. As Donnie already pointed out, I did not mean version bumps, but only new=20 packages. How about this idea: Everyone who adds a new package, has to chec= k=20 and fix an unmaintained package before. This should be a non-issue for=20 seasoned developers, but would slowdown those, who continually add new=20 packages without caring for what they should maintain as well as those who= =20 become new devs, add a bunch of packages and hide again, leaving the=20 maintenance to others. This would also have the benefit of continuous QA of= =20 unmaintained stuff. Regarding PR: The quality of parts of the tree is more than enough bad PR. > If you feel so strongly about this, why not setup a "cleaning crew" > project that goes around doing exactly this? Don't you think that it is pretty much barefaced to let a small group do th= e=20 dirty, boring and annoying work, while those who don't care a bit can=20 continue to do so?! Carsten --nextPart2518297.GFo6R0kXVt Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDwRZkVwbzmvGLSW8RAlbKAJ4nvMn0vEGJX05lylNDQ/0x0KOXcwCeLGSU 6q3gPK7hpIHjJ6jU/UJaVRI= =KlEJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2518297.GFo6R0kXVt-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list