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 1OPedL-00034D-6k for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 18 Jun 2010 16:41:35 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 733F5E08F5; Fri, 18 Jun 2010 16:41:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from nimiux.org (nimiux.org [213.251.187.99]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C409CE0827 for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2010 16:41:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from nibbler.es (unknown [77.227.13.52]) by nimiux.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0FF95192 for ; Fri, 18 Jun 2010 18:48:23 +0200 (CEST) Date: Fri, 18 Jun 2010 18:42:16 +0200 From: =?utf-8?B?Sm9zw6kgTWFyw61h?= Alonso To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Packages up for grabs -- xmerlin, yoswink, chtekk, omp, tantive, mueli, bluebird, hncaldwell, caleb Message-ID: <20100618164215.GA7654@muiri> References: <20100602071850.GA25028@veller.net> <20100608111406.GA2132@muiri> <20100608182517.0ba1b80b@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net> <20100608195911.GA20808@muiri> 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; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Organization: gentoo.org User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Archives-Salt: 30983fad-0585-41ba-9f6d-cbf4b469a872 X-Archives-Hash: 438cb936d103ac6d0098a276541649fa --d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 08:29:01PM +0300, Markos Chandras wrote: > 2010/6/8 Jos=C3=A9 Mar=C3=ADa >=20 > > On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 06:25:17PM +0200, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > > > On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 13:14:07 +0200 > > > Jos=C3=A9 Mar=C3=ADa Alonso wrote: > > > > > > > I would be very pleased to maintain this package: > > > > > > > > > app-doc/repodoc > > > > > > > Is there any chance I can maintain this package?. What do > > > > I have to do?. > > > > > > You could provide unified patches to the ebuilds to fix the four > > > outstanding bugs[1] with the package. Someone should CC themselves on > > > those bugs who has commit access for the thing to work, of course. > > > Maybe the live (-9999) ebuild could use some work too. > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > jer > > > > > > > > > [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=3Drepodoc > > > > > > > Thank you very much for pointing me in the right direction. > > I'll begin to work in those bugs. > > > > Cheers. > > > > Ok, then I won't mask this package for removal ( I was about to do it r= ight > now when I accidentally remembered this thread ) for now. If the bugs are > still unresolved after 30 days I will have to mask it for removal. In the > meantime, if you have working patches for the repodoc bugs [1], I can com= mit > them for you and proxy this package for you until you gain tree access >=20 > [1]: http://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=3Drepodoc Thank you for your help in trying to get the app-doc/repodoc package back to live :-) I've found some information on this package: 1. I've contacted Fernando Pereda (ferdy), one of the authors of repodoc. He told me (as expected) that this package is no longer maintained. He recommends to find out if the translatos are=20 currently using this package (seems very reasonable). Besides, the package is not very secure, since it allows to run commands by using a specially modify doc. It is slow and the technologies used (bash and sed) are not the proper ones to manage XML. 2. I've pinged the gentoo-translators maillist [1] to find translators who are using this package. I've got only one negative answer in a week or so. 3. I've taken a look at the package's unresolved bugs: 197617 - Seems tough to fix, according to yoswink and neysx comments. 297946 - I've posted a comment [2] in this bug. No answer at the moment. 297947 - Haven't check yet. 299753 - Seems easy to fix. So, IMO you can mark it for removal. Regards. [1] http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-translators/msg_657e5892cf0962d65d8f= 778ebdda3b86.xml [2] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D297946#c2 --d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJMG6HnAAoJEA2sAkrWKOU2RMQIALY1ItZpHxmCov5UT66wtYSQ BQCU4xyy7E9q7gSq1+LviA+17f944go46k8aXW2APoyj+5igNuVPyh0JbAC1fNwK t6wFprF2mSZIuDx/AuwmBjG30mdNQlgLq8IaiFIOte2gbd4bYpkx/aLWRP9MzAmL ZKgbCTBLdU44SQR5hbQn+r+3aCLEP5wA+3QqMItfs+1QFOFrRJVrxxkWrUrk9Xdg 8U8BwE2Z8ry7+ZsMMIM8jwVAV74LxkWO0qDwCt3dB9JiEvsWBVfRYDo4o6f5OyO1 PBivLkAjYm9sEro+m2aHjMr16wKFjVdMjvqS+6ejLCu+i7Z8XomETDg0OclQTrg= =gZrp -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --d6Gm4EdcadzBjdND--