[gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for June

[gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for June

[Mike Frysinger]

This is your monthly friendly reminder !  Same bat time (typically
the 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel
(#gentoo-council @ irc.freenode.net) !

If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
vote on, let us know !  Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole
Gentoo dev list to see.

Keep in mind that every GLEP *re*submission to the council for review
must first be sent to the gentoo-dev mailing list 7 days (minimum)
before being submitted as an agenda item which itself occurs 7 days
before the meeting.  Simply put, the gentoo-dev mailing list must be
notified at least 14 days before the meeting itself.

For more info on the Gentoo Council, feel free to browse our homepage:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for June

[Alec Warner]

On 01 Jun 2008 05:30:01, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> This is your monthly friendly reminder !  Same bat time (typically
>  the 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel
>  (#gentoo-council @ irc.freenode.net) !
>
>  If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
>  vote on, let us know !  Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole
>  Gentoo dev list to see.

I would like the council to vote on whether --as-needed will be added
to gentoo by default or not.

>
>  Keep in mind that every GLEP *re*submission to the council for review
>  must first be sent to the gentoo-dev mailing list 7 days (minimum)
>  before being submitted as an agenda item which itself occurs 7 days
>  before the meeting.  Simply put, the gentoo-dev mailing list must be
>  notified at least 14 days before the meeting itself.
>
>  For more info on the Gentoo Council, feel free to browse our homepage:
>  http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/
>
> --
>  gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for June

[Mart Raudsepp]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1599 bytes --]

On P, 2008-06-01 at 05:30 +0000, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> This is your monthly friendly reminder !  Same bat time (typically
> the 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel
> (#gentoo-council @ irc.freenode.net) !
> 
> If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even
> vote on, let us know !  Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole
> Gentoo dev list to see.

I am still waiting on seeing any results or follow-ups on this:

        Can the council help fewer bugs get ignored by arm/sh/s390 teams?
        -----------------------------------------------------------------
        The work happens, but Mart says it's not communicated to anyone and 
        has no relationship to whether bugs are open.

        We need to understand the workflow of undermanned arch teams and see 
        whether there's anything we can help improve.

        Possibly improving recuitment -- add a good, motivating 
        staffing-needs entry.

I still don't see any staffing needs entry or other methods to solve
this beyond declaring them as dev profiles which doesn't help with the
bugs, and I can't know if any effort has been underway for understanding
the workflow. Without an update, it gives the impression nothing has
been done, which I don't want to believe. I'd appreciate an update - not
necessarily as part of the council agenda, but perhaps just per mail,
with any discussions if any is necessary during the meeting.


-- 
Mart Raudsepp
Gentoo Developer
Mail: leio@gentoo.org
Weblog: http://planet.gentoo.org/developers/leio

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for June

[Raúl Porcel]

Requesting ~arch keywords: Is a maintainer able to request ~arch 
keywords, if the package is not a dependency of some other package which 
is keyworded, and the maintainer doesn't have that arch?

IMHO the packages should be keyworded if an arch team member or an user 
of that arch requests it. Keywording something if an user of said arch 
doesn't request it, is a waste of resources.
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for June

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1021 bytes --]

On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 19:41:28 +0200
Raúl Porcel <armin76@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Requesting ~arch keywords: Is a maintainer able to request ~arch 
> keywords, if the package is not a dependency of some other package
> which is keyworded, and the maintainer doesn't have that arch?

Yes.  Last time I looked anyone could request a keyword.

> IMHO the packages should be keyworded if an arch team member or an
> user of that arch requests it. Keywording something if an user of
> said arch doesn't request it, is a waste of resources.

How is making things available to your users a waste of resources?
Anyways, if you're so far behind that you don't think you can manage
keywording another package then just say so and deny the request.

What does this have to do with council?

-- 
fonts, gcc-porting,                               by design, by neglect
mips, treecleaner,                        for a fact or just for effect
wxwidgets @ gentoo     EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for June

[Richard Freeman]

Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 19:41:28 +0200
> Raúl Porcel <armin76@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>> IMHO the packages should be keyworded if an arch team member or an
>> user of that arch requests it. Keywording something if an user of
>> said arch doesn't request it, is a waste of resources.
> 
> How is making things available to your users a waste of resources?
> Anyways, if you're so far behind that you don't think you can manage
> keywording another package then just say so and deny the request.
> 

++

I'd like to comment that in theory a package maintainer should have a 
decent idea of what archs a particular package should work on.  I can't 
imagine that the vmware maintainers are going to be sending keyword 
requests to the sparc team...
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for June

[Alec Warner]

On 6/1/08, Richard Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Ryan Hill wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 19:41:28 +0200
> > Raúl Porcel <armin76@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> > > IMHO the packages should be keyworded if an arch team member or an
> > > user of that arch requests it. Keywording something if an user of
> > > said arch doesn't request it, is a waste of resources.
> > >
> >
> > How is making things available to your users a waste of resources?
> > Anyways, if you're so far behind that you don't think you can manage
> > keywording another package then just say so and deny the request.
> >
> >
>
>  ++
>
>  I'd like to comment that in theory a package maintainer should have a
> decent idea of what archs a particular package should work on.  I can't
> imagine that the vmware maintainers are going to be sending keyword requests
> to the sparc team...

Contrary to your theory I think in the past this has proven to be
false; however I am not sure how often this was the case (eg. were
just a few maintainers overzeallous or did we have widespread
problems.)

>
>  --
>  gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for June

[Raúl Porcel]

Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 19:41:28 +0200
> Raúl Porcel <armin76@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>> Requesting ~arch keywords: Is a maintainer able to request ~arch 
>> keywords, if the package is not a dependency of some other package
>> which is keyworded, and the maintainer doesn't have that arch?
> 
> Yes.  Last time I looked anyone could request a keyword.
> 
>> IMHO the packages should be keyworded if an arch team member or an
>> user of that arch requests it. Keywording something if an user of
>> said arch doesn't request it, is a waste of resources.
> 
> How is making things available to your users a waste of resources?
> Anyways, if you're so far behind that you don't think you can manage
> keywording another package then just say so and deny the request.
> 
> What does this have to do with council?
> 

And whats the point of having some package keyworded if nobody is going 
to use it?
I don't care anyway, i just want an official clarification, personally i 
tend to keyword stuff if i think its going to be useful.

Thing is, whats the difference in a maintainer asking for a package to 
be keyworded and keywording all the packages in the tree?
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for June

[Santiago M. Mola]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8, Size: 1474 bytes --]

On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 11:18 AM, Raúl Porcel <armin76@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Ryan Hill wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 01 Jun 2008 19:41:28 +0200
>> Raúl Porcel <armin76@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>
>>> IMHO the packages should be keyworded if an arch team member or an
>>> user of that arch requests it. Keywording something if an user of
>>> said arch doesn't request it, is a waste of resources.
>>
>> How is making things available to your users a waste of resources?
>> Anyways, if you're so far behind that you don't think you can manage
>> keywording another package then just say so and deny the request.
>>
>> What does this have to do with council?
>>
>
> And whats the point of having some package keyworded if nobody is going to
> use it?
> I don't care anyway, i just want an official clarification, personally i
> tend to keyword stuff if i think its going to be useful.
>
> Thing is, whats the difference in a maintainer asking for a package to be
> keyworded and keywording all the packages in the tree?

You're not going to be asked to keyword the whole tree, that's the
difference ;-)

I think we have not enough feedback from users about this. Either
Bugzilla is not the right tool, or we don't encourage users enough to
ask for keywords when they need them. Currently, some people assume
that "if a user from $arch needed this package, he'd have requested
keywords", but that's wrong.

Regards,
-- 
Santiago M. Mola
Jabber ID: cooldwind@gmail.com
éí¢‡^¾X¬¶È\x1ežÚ(¢¸&j)bž	b²

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for June

[Luca Barbato]

Santiago M. Mola wrote:
> I think we have not enough feedback from users about this. Either
> Bugzilla is not the right tool, or we don't encourage users enough to
> ask for keywords when they need them. Currently, some people assume
> that "if a user from $arch needed this package, he'd have requested
> keywords", but that's wrong.

Good point and probably a good start to find a decent solution about 
getting the stuff needed by user keyworded but not overwork arch teams.

Probably having 2-4 lines about this in the next newsletter could foster 
awareness.

Having a smarter repoman and bugzilla integration to handle 
stabilization and keyword bugs automagically would be great but I think 
would require time (since such bugs could spare the dev some trips 
around bugzie)

lu

-- 

Luca Barbato
Gentoo Council Member
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero

-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for June

[Christian Faulhammer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 855 bytes --]

Hi,

Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org>:
> Probably having 2-4 lines about this in the next newsletter could
> foster awareness.

 All for it.  Will you write it?
 
> Having a smarter repoman and bugzilla integration to handle 
> stabilization and keyword bugs automagically would be great but I
> think would require time (since such bugs could spare the dev some
> trips around bugzie)

 I'd like to point to app-portage/gatt again which can automate a lot of
your everyday arch work.  At least two amd64 arch testers, ranger and
myself use it regularly.  <URL:http://gatt.sourceforge.net/> for
details (it is the manual, the examples section has some work-flow
snippets).

V-Li

-- 
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode

<URL:http://www.faulhammer.org/>

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]