From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NUlW1-0005YF-5F for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 18:30:53 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id EBA62E07F2; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 18:30:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtpauth05.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (smtpauth05.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net [64.202.165.99]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9D2B4E07F2 for ; Tue, 12 Jan 2010 18:30:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 32617 invoked from network); 12 Jan 2010 18:30:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (94.66.160.145) by smtpauth05.prod.mesa1.secureserver.net (64.202.165.99) with ESMTP; 12 Jan 2010 18:30:31 -0000 From: Markos Chandras To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Last rites: net-nntp/inn Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:30:26 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.4 (Linux/2.6.32-zen4-night-elf; KDE/4.3.4; x86_64; ; ) References: <201001112305.16532.hwoarang@gentoo.org> <201001121832.11523.hwoarang@gentoo.org> <20100112192159.0fa03cd1@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> In-Reply-To: <20100112192159.0fa03cd1@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2255085.53mMYhi6eY"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201001122030.27164.hwoarang@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: eee36b91-8d5c-4be9-8d04-7485345a4ddb X-Archives-Hash: 7d769279075eeb82386e011887729f17 --nextPart2255085.53mMYhi6eY Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tuesday 12 January 2010 20:21:59 Jeroen Roovers wrote: > On Tue, 12 Jan 2010 18:32:06 +0200 >=20 > Markos Chandras wrote: > > Thanks for saving this package. As Jeremy said, there is absolutely > > no way to measure the popularity of a package. So if it has no > > maintainer, and open bugs we have to mask it and announce it here. It > > is up to you whether you want to save it or not >=20 > I don't think the (perceived) popularity of the package has anything to > do with it. >=20 > I do think maybe treecleaner@ needs to set up policies with regard to > methods of investigation, thoroughness, and transparency. In the case > at hand, treecleaner shouldn't have been called in (you're not the > bloody cavalry you know! ;-) in the first place, and should certainly > not have acted (so quickly). >=20 > It's not clear to me generally what you (treecleaner@) all do and why > you do it - but it *is* clear that it's very easy to `rm -r *' to get > rid of some old stuff and that you may end up regretting it later. >=20 > Particularly, it looks like the net-mail, net-news and netmon herds are > understaffed and have been for a while, and I see a general shift of > developers towards desktop oriented packages and away from the nuts and > bolts that make it all go. >=20 > I think (but have no facts apart from talking to people and handling > network package related bugs in every way possible) that our userbase > is still much more technically oriented. If that's all true, then doing > some `rm net-*/*' cleanups may well end up hurting Gentoo as you would > drive out more of the networking oriented people (users and developers) > that I feel we still need to support, and turn into Yet Another Desktop > Oriented Distro (which we also need, but that's already covered quite > well). So what do you suggest? Have old, unmaintained and broken ( or forgotten )= =20 packages under those categories in order to preserve the "personality" of=20 Gentoo? IMHO ( this is not a treecleaners@ opinion, i m just talking for my= =20 self ), announcing and masking a package is a good way to inform and wake u= p=20 everybody to take care of this package if they really really want to stay o= n=20 portage. Having broken and unmaintained packages on tree, just to say that = we=20 have plenty of packages on portage is not acceptable policy imho. So if you= =20 want a package, plz take care of it :) >=20 > ISTR treecleaner@ already had some policy in place that requires some > $period to pass before you mask for removal. Maybe you should announce > an upcoming mask nice and early to keep that shock wave from reaching > users straight away. Having open bugs for months isn't a way to let everybody know that this=20 package is broken for long time, so it is a valid candidate for removal?=20 Should we send that via e-mail as well?=20 >=20 >=20 > Regards, > jer >=20 =2D-=20 Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org --nextPart2255085.53mMYhi6eY Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAktMv8MACgkQ9/cejkQaxBD+FgCeK2WRnGqJuzuYPeHS2X2k4VE/ H6AAnA4NzrLkjoywvnWc2iNo8I6Enrgy =THmr -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2255085.53mMYhi6eY--