public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Kent Fredric <kentnl@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: change to default policy of doing changes to packages that are maintained by other developers
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2019 13:36:42 +1300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191022133642.41590ee5@katipo2.lan> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <dab964a7-e91c-fa21-4ec0-75f4860c69f8@gentoo.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1688 bytes --]

On Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:37:28 +0200
Piotr Karbowski <slashbeast@gentoo.org> wrote:

> This is a bit unhealthy, especially when some developers that maintain
> packages are out of reach, or the patches to update ebuild just rot on
> the bugzilla and are not taken in by maintainers.

IME this is far from the norm and should not be used as the
justification here.

I would argue some *honest* attempt be made to contact the people
officially responsible for the package.

If they can't be contacted in a reasonable time frame, sure, by all
means.

But I cannot support a policy where it creates a conjecture of "I think
this patch doesn't matter, so I'll just do it".

Because in practice, no change, no matter how apparently insignificant,
is immune from the risk of creating a quality reduction.

And no change, is immune from potentially affecting the package
maintainers workflow. ( For example, if you drop in a sed, or a patch,
when the package uses a carefully curated tar-ball of patches which are
also carefully tested against upstream sources on travis or something,
by dropping the patch in unconsulted, you run the risk of pissing
somebody off by adding a patch in ways that by-passes and potentially
confounds these efforts. )

It really sucks having to review somebodies changes after-the-fact
where you discover the change long after it was done, because nobody
even tried to communicate.

Reasonable attempts should be made, _especially_ if there are multiple
maintainers for a package, or a project with multiple members.

If you don't have the patience to even wait _one_ day for a response,
maybe you shouldn't be doing opensource.

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-10-22  0:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2019-10-21 17:37 [gentoo-dev] Proposal: change to default policy of doing changes to packages that are maintained by other developers Piotr Karbowski
2019-10-21 18:06 ` Matthew Thode
2019-10-22  0:36 ` Kent Fredric [this message]
2019-10-22  0:58   ` Matt Turner
2019-10-22  4:07     ` Kent Fredric
2019-10-22  0:55 ` Matt Turner

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20191022133642.41590ee5@katipo2.lan \
    --to=kentnl@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox