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 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HDSQs-0003u8-8d for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 03 Feb 2007 21:28:26 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id l13LQkPT020738; Sat, 3 Feb 2007 21:26:46 GMT Received: from mail-relay-3.tiscali.it (mail-relay-3.tiscali.it [213.205.33.43]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id l13LLn8H012376 for ; Sat, 3 Feb 2007 21:21:49 GMT Received: from c1358217.kevquinn.com (84.223.100.235) by mail-relay-3.tiscali.it (7.2.079) id 458A7C080046333E for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 3 Feb 2007 22:16:18 +0100 Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2007 22:18:49 +0100 From: "Kevin F. Quinn" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February Message-ID: <20070203221849.5f72924b@c1358217.kevquinn.com> In-Reply-To: References: <20070201103001.74DF064F14@smtp.gentoo.org> <45C2332D.7000901@gentoo.org> <20070201193743.5c25eaf5@snowdrop> <45C24B6D.4080903@gentoo.org> <20070202014919.0ea085ac@c1358217.kevquinn.com> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.5.6 (GTK+ 2.10.6; i686-pc-linux-gnu) 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=Sig_h6zrNvipIsI3kqk+BBPyUhG; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: 5faf8c8a-e642-4140-a30a-c63c049ade03 X-Archives-Hash: 4779f2c7335e0610262ca43a80c60712 --Sig_h6zrNvipIsI3kqk+BBPyUhG Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 03 Feb 2007 14:04:49 -0600 Ryan Hill 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. > >=20 > > 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. >=20 > 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 >=20 > 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. --=20 Kevin F. Quinn --Sig_h6zrNvipIsI3kqk+BBPyUhG Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFxPw99G2S8dekcG0RAjp/AJ9xvd79OzhVOLEo0iICP/zXddazigCg3qzv KudVJhYYX9q1exkn/clZSaU= =8jtU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_h6zrNvipIsI3kqk+BBPyUhG-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list