[gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Markus Nigbur]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1273 bytes --]

Hi gang,

I just (again) noticed I'm currently the only active developer of the
desktop-misc herd, which is going to change as soon as the recruitment
process is reopened again.
About 80% of all bugs assigned to desktop-misc are new ebuild
submissions for software which either falls into no other graphical
application herds responsibility or applications that are not wanted by
the relevant herds. Which is just fine, I don't want to hear any whining
here, it's one of the purposes of the desktop-misc herd.

Anyway, as I've already said I'm the _currently_ the only active herd
member and simply cannot take the responsibility of about 100 new
packages.
Therefor I suggest introducing a new keyword to bugzilla's resolution
list, called NEEDMAINTAINER.
With this new keyword everyone could compile a list of currently
unmaintained packages and just take the ones he likes. Additionally this
would be a great opportunity for non-developers for starting their
carrier within Gentoo.

PS: If I'm repeating my self.. It's 4:30am and I'm awake for 68 hours,
so..

Regards, 
  Markus

-- 
 (o_  Markus Nigbur
 //\  Gentoo GNU/Linux Developer
[ ]/_ http://www.gentoo.org
      GPG Fingerprint: 9E31 187A 6C78 210C F248  EDBB F2FB A77F 707D F8C1

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Luis F. Araujo]

Markus Nigbur wrote:

>Hi gang,
>
>I just (again) noticed I'm currently the only active developer of the
>desktop-misc herd, which is going to change as soon as the recruitment
>process is reopened again.
>About 80% of all bugs assigned to desktop-misc are new ebuild
>submissions for software which either falls into no other graphical
>application herds responsibility or applications that are not wanted by
>the relevant herds. Which is just fine, I don't want to hear any whining
>here, it's one of the purposes of the desktop-misc herd.
>
>Anyway, as I've already said I'm the _currently_ the only active herd
>member and simply cannot take the responsibility of about 100 new
>packages.
>Therefor I suggest introducing a new keyword to bugzilla's resolution
>list, called NEEDMAINTAINER.
>With this new keyword everyone could compile a list of currently
>unmaintained packages and just take the ones he likes. Additionally this
>would be a great opportunity for non-developers for starting their
>carrier within Gentoo.
>
>PS: If I'm repeating my self.. It's 4:30am and I'm awake for 68 hours,
>so..
>
>Regards, 
>  Markus
>
>  
>
I like this idea.
I actually proposed a similar idea time ago in #-dev , but
instead of doing it from bugzilla, to do it from the web site, (i like
yours better)
the main idea is to have a list of unmantained packages (no herd, no
mantainer),
so we can avoid surprises, and it'd be easier for users and for new
developers aspirants to know what they can cooperate with.

Regards,
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Andrej Kacian]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 716 bytes --]

On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 05:33:01 -0400
"Luis F. Araujo" <araujo@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I like this idea.
> I actually proposed a similar idea time ago in #-dev , but
> instead of doing it from bugzilla, to do it from the web site, (i like
> yours better)
> the main idea is to have a list of unmantained packages (no herd, no
> mantainer),
> so we can avoid surprises, and it'd be easier for users and for new
> developers aspirants to know what they can cooperate with.

http://bugday.gentoo.org has that functionality, partiall - except that noone
has the time/motivation to update it regularly.

-- 
Andrej "Ticho" Kacian <ticho at gentoo dot org>
Gentoo Linux Developer - net-mail, antivirus, amd64

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Maurice van der Pot]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 872 bytes --]

On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 04:35:27AM +0200, Markus Nigbur wrote:
> Therefor I suggest introducing a new keyword to bugzilla's resolution
> list, called NEEDMAINTAINER.
> With this new keyword everyone could compile a list of currently
> unmaintained packages and just take the ones he likes. Additionally this
> would be a great opportunity for non-developers for starting their
> carrier within Gentoo.

I definitely would like to see this. Just a few days ago I was
considering adding a comment along the lines of "we need a maintainer
for this package, that's why nothing is happening" to some bug reports.
NEEDMAINTAINER is clearly a neater solution.

*Thumbs up*

Maurice.

-- 
Maurice van der Pot

Gentoo Linux Developer   griffon26@gentoo.org     http://www.gentoo.org
Creator of BiteMe!       griffon26@kfk4ever.com   http://www.kfk4ever.com


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Andrej Kacian]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 573 bytes --]

On Mon, 13 Jun 2005 18:36:09 +0200
Maurice van der Pot <griffon26@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I definitely would like to see this. Just a few days ago I was
> considering adding a comment along the lines of "we need a maintainer
> for this package, that's why nothing is happening" to some bug reports.
> NEEDMAINTAINER is clearly a neater solution.

Indeed, and having such resolution available prevents all those "nee
maintainer" kind of typo annoyances. :)

-- 
Andrej "Ticho" Kacian <ticho at gentoo dot org>
Gentoo Linux Developer - net-mail, antivirus, amd64

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Jeffrey Forman]

Maurice van der Pot wrote:
> 
> I definitely would like to see this. Just a few days ago I was
> considering adding a comment along the lines of "we need a maintainer
> for this package, that's why nothing is happening" to some bug reports.
> NEEDMAINTAINER is clearly a neater solution.
> 
> *Thumbs up*

Give me a few days, and I should be able to add the resolution.
Resolutions are one of the most painful things to add to bugzilla (the
version we're running now requires hacking the source. Supposedly in the
next version it's a web form). Be patient and the force will be with you
all.

-Jeffrey

-- 

------------------
Jeffrey Forman
Gentoo Infrastructure
Gentoo Release Engineering
Bugs.Gentoo.org Admin
jforman@gentoo.org
------------------

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Daniel Drake]

Markus Nigbur wrote:
> Anyway, as I've already said I'm the _currently_ the only active herd
> member and simply cannot take the responsibility of about 100 new
> packages.
> Therefor I suggest introducing a new keyword to bugzilla's resolution
> list, called NEEDMAINTAINER.
> With this new keyword everyone could compile a list of currently
> unmaintained packages and just take the ones he likes. Additionally this
> would be a great opportunity for non-developers for starting their
> carrier within Gentoo.

I like the concept but I think that a previous suggestion that was discussed
here was better. The suggestion was to create a maintainer-needed@gentoo.org
alias which bugs could be assigned to. The discussion was a while ago but I
don't recall any negative points being raised.

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Maurice van der Pot]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 708 bytes --]

On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 06:17:12PM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
> I like the concept but I think that a previous suggestion that was discussed
> here was better. The suggestion was to create a maintainer-needed@gentoo.org
> alias which bugs could be assigned to. The discussion was a while ago but I
> don't recall any negative points being raised.

Do you have a date or thread subject or something like that? I can't
find it in the archives. I would like to see some reasons why one or the
other is better.

Maurice.

-- 
Maurice van der Pot

Gentoo Linux Developer   griffon26@gentoo.org     http://www.gentoo.org
Creator of BiteMe!       griffon26@kfk4ever.com   http://www.kfk4ever.com


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Daniel Drake]

Maurice van der Pot wrote:
> Do you have a date or thread subject or something like that? I can't
> find it in the archives. I would like to see some reasons why one or the
> other is better.

I can't remember and I can't see it in the archives. Maybe I was dreaming...

I think it logically fits better into having its own assignee. Most
resolutions suggest that no further action is needed, I don't think this is
the case here (remember we are talking about RESOLVED NEEDMAINTAINER...)

As well as that, people could add themselves to the email alias if they are
interested.

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Stefan Schweizer]

Am Montag 13 Juni 2005 20:15 schrieb Daniel Drake:
> Maurice van der Pot wrote:
> > Do you have a date or thread subject or something like that? I can't
> > find it in the archives. I would like to see some reasons why one or the
> > other is better.
>
> I can't remember and I can't see it in the archives. Maybe I was
> dreaming...
>
> I think it logically fits better into having its own assignee. Most
> resolutions suggest that no further action is needed, I don't think this is
> the case here (remember we are talking about RESOLVED NEEDMAINTAINER...)
>
> As well as that, people could add themselves to the email alias if they are
> interested.

I think its better to leave the package on the right alias, because its easier 
to find all pkges without maintainer for a certain herd then.
Most of the people will want to start with only one herd to get ebuilds added, 
so it imo makes really sense to leave them grouped.	

Reassigning to need-maintainer@ would remove the herd-information and 
therefore I am against it.

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Maurice van der Pot]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 398 bytes --]

On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 08:31:58PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> Reassigning to need-maintainer@ would remove the herd-information and 
> therefore I am against it.

Ok, so what about adding it to the CC then?

-- 
Maurice van der Pot

Gentoo Linux Developer   griffon26@gentoo.org     http://www.gentoo.org
Creator of BiteMe!       griffon26@kfk4ever.com   http://www.kfk4ever.com


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Daniel Drake]

Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> I think its better to leave the package on the right alias, because its easier 
> to find all pkges without maintainer for a certain herd then.
> Most of the people will want to start with only one herd to get ebuilds added, 
> so it imo makes really sense to leave them grouped.	

When a bug is assigned to a herd I'm in, I interpret it as something that
needs to be (or will be) acted upon.

If someone posts a new package and it gets assigned to my herd, and nobody in
my herd wants to maintain it, we hardly want it sitting around on our buglist
where its never going to get any attention.

Assigning it to a dedicated alias would get it out of my way and into the view
of people who potentially want to maintain the package and maybe join the herd
too.

And yes, it certainly makes sense to have relevant herds CC'd on these bugs.

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Lance Albertson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1574 bytes --]

On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 20:49 +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
> Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> > I think its better to leave the package on the right alias, because its easier 
> > to find all pkges without maintainer for a certain herd then.
> > Most of the people will want to start with only one herd to get ebuilds added, 
> > so it imo makes really sense to leave them grouped.	
> 
> When a bug is assigned to a herd I'm in, I interpret it as something that
> needs to be (or will be) acted upon.
> 
> If someone posts a new package and it gets assigned to my herd, and nobody in
> my herd wants to maintain it, we hardly want it sitting around on our buglist
> where its never going to get any attention.
> 
> Assigning it to a dedicated alias would get it out of my way and into the view
> of people who potentially want to maintain the package and maybe join the herd
> too.
> 
> And yes, it certainly makes sense to have relevant herds CC'd on these bugs.

Hrm, this is making me wonder if a combined alias for new ebuilds and
ebuilds that need maintainers could be used. The current alias as
new-ebuilds probably wouldn't fit this as well. If seemant is up for it,
we could just use something like need-maintainers or something simliar
to that name? If we did that, would we still need the resolution?

-- 
Lance Albertson <ramereth@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager

---
Public GPG key:  <http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc>
Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1  4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742

ramereth/irc.freenode.net

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Daniel Drake]

Lance Albertson wrote:
> Hrm, this is making me wonder if a combined alias for new ebuilds and
> ebuilds that need maintainers could be used. The current alias as
> new-ebuilds probably wouldn't fit this as well. If seemant is up for it,
> we could just use something like need-maintainers or something simliar
> to that name? If we did that, would we still need the resolution?

The way I see it is that if an ebuild is to be worked on and maintained by a
particular developer/herd then it should be assigned to the relevant people as
normal.

If the ebuild doesn't stir up that much attention and nobody wants it, it
should get reassigned to maintainer-needed@gentoo.org, until someone picks it
up or decides that the package is not worthy of being in the portage tree.

An extra resolution would not be needed. I don't see the need for a
new-ebuilds alias because everything can be categorised into the above two
categories (someone is going to do something with this soon, or, there is no
interest from that herd/developer at the current time).

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Markus Nigbur]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 663 bytes --]

On Monday 13 June 2005 23:58, Lance Albertson wrote:
> Hrm, this is making me wonder if a combined alias for new ebuilds and
> ebuilds that need maintainers could be used. The current alias as
> new-ebuilds probably wouldn't fit this as well. If seemant is up for it,
> we could just use something like need-maintainers or something simliar
> to that name? If we did that, would we still need the resolution?

No I think with the alias the resolution would be overkill/redundant/obsolete.

-- 
 (o_  Markus Nigbur
 //\  Gentoo GNU/Linux Developer
[ ]/_ http://www.gentoo.org
      GPG Fingerprint: 9E31 187A 6C78 210C F248  EDBB F2FB A77F 707D F8C1

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Final proposal: New alias maintainer-needed@g.o or some such (speak now or forever hold your peace ;) )

[Maurice van der Pot]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 603 bytes --]

So I take it everybody who replied on this thread is in agreement that
the creation of an alias (e.g. maintainer-needed@gentoo.org) would be
the best solution and that it is upto the herd to choose between
assigning the bug to the new alias and putting the herd on the cc and
the other way around?

If this is introduced we need to record it somewhere. I'm not sure what
would be the best place though.

Maurice.

-- 
Maurice van der Pot

Gentoo Linux Developer   griffon26@gentoo.org     http://www.gentoo.org
Creator of BiteMe!       griffon26@kfk4ever.com   http://www.kfk4ever.com


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Final proposal: New alias maintainer-needed@g.o or some such (speak now or forever hold your peace ;) )

[Markus Nigbur]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1097 bytes --]

On Wednesday 15 June 2005 20:49, Maurice van der Pot wrote:
> So I take it everybody who replied on this thread is in agreement that
> the creation of an alias (e.g. maintainer-needed@gentoo.org) would be
> the best solution and that it is upto the herd to choose between
> assigning the bug to the new alias and putting the herd on the cc and
> the other way around?

Assigning to m-n@g.o and adding the actual fitting herd to CC is the most 
elegant option, IMHO.
However we do it, we should really agree on one solution, to get more 
structure into the chaos.

> If this is introduced we need to record it somewhere. I'm not sure what
> would be the best place though.

- Topic of #gentoo-dev
- -core mail
- Developer Handbook (which really needs a section about how bugs are treated. 
I always wanted to write up a draft when I find the time...)
- Announce the existence and purpose of the alias in the GWN

-- 
 (o_  Markus Nigbur
 //\  Gentoo GNU/Linux Developer
[ ]/_ http://www.gentoo.org
      GPG Fingerprint: 9E31 187A 6C78 210C F248  EDBB F2FB A77F 707D F8C1

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Final proposal: New alias maintainer-needed@g.o or some such (speak now or forever hold your peace ;) )

[Daniel Drake]

Markus Nigbur wrote:
> Assigning to m-n@g.o and adding the actual fitting herd to CC is the most 
> elegant option, IMHO.
> However we do it, we should really agree on one solution, to get more 
> structure into the chaos.

Here's what I'd propose:

This only applies to new packages, as opposed to version bumps or whatever else:

When an ebuild or ebuild request is posted to bugzilla, the bug wranglers
attempt to find an appropriate herd or developer to assign it to, and the
ebuild is keyworded with EBUILD or REQUEST depending whether an ebuild was
included or not.

If the herd or developer does not want to maintain the package and they feel
that there is another herd or developer where this package would be more
appropriately maintained, then they should reassign it to them.

At any point, if a developer or herd decides that they do not want to maintain
the package at the current time, and there is no more appropriate
herd/developer, then they reassign it to maintainer-needed@gentoo.org putting
the most appropriate herd(s)/developer(s) on CC.

Interested developers can then take bugs from the maintainer-needed alias and
reassign to themselves before getting the ebuild included in portage - but the
usual policies still apply, for example if its a web application you'll
probably be asked to join the webapps herd, and if its a kernel then you'll
have to go through the torture chamber and then join our project before adding
the package, etc...

Herds/developers that are CC'd on the maintainer-needed bugs are free to
completely close the bugs if there is a good reason why the package won't be
included in portage at the current time. For example, I'd reject an ebuild for
an external 2.6 kernel module which doesn't work for kernels 2.6.4 and newer,
because we don't support those older kernels at all. (These kind of bugs might
even be closed before it got assigned to maintainer-needed)

Developers can query for open maintainer-needed EBUILD bugs if they are
looking for new packages to maintain, and users can query for open
maintainer-needed REQUEST bugs if they want some ebuild writing practice.

Perhaps a complete list of open maintainer-needed bugs could be added to the
default preset queries..?


Any comments on that?


> - Developer Handbook (which really needs a section about how bugs are treated. 
> I always wanted to write up a draft when I find the time...)

I think we need some real bugzilla documentation that covers both basic usage
and also policies on bugs/resolutions/ownership and what to do if you think
your bug is being ignored. This is also on my todo list but has been for a
long time.

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

[gentoo-dev] Re: Final proposal: New alias maintainer-needed@g.o or some such (speak now or forever hold your peace ;) )

[Torsten Veller]

* Daniel Drake <dsd@gentoo.org>:

> Markus Nigbur wrote:
> > Assigning to m-n@g.o and adding the actual fitting herd to CC is the most 
> > elegant option, IMHO.
> > However we do it, we should really agree on one solution, to get more 
> > structure into the chaos.
> 
> Here's what I'd propose:
> 
> This only applies to new packages, as opposed to version bumps or whatever else:
> 
> When an ebuild or ebuild request is posted to bugzilla, the bug wranglers
> attempt to find an appropriate herd or developer to assign it to, and the
> ebuild is keyworded with EBUILD or REQUEST depending whether an ebuild was
> included or not.
> 
> If the herd or developer does not want to maintain the package and they feel
> that there is another herd or developer where this package would be more
> appropriately maintained, then they should reassign it to them.
> 
> At any point, if a developer or herd decides that they do not want to maintain
> the package at the current time, and there is no more appropriate
> herd/developer, then they reassign it to maintainer-needed@gentoo.org putting
> the most appropriate herd(s)/developer(s) on CC.

Agreed.

Please don't assign bugs of packages in the tree to maintainer-needed.



Proposal: Bugs for packages in the tree where bugwranglers are not able to find
          a maintainer go to qa@g.o.
          Bump requests might be annoying, but i think it's still the best thing to do.
Comments?
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Final proposal: New alias maintainer-needed@g.o or some such (speak now or forever hold your peace ;) )

[Maurice van der Pot]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1057 bytes --]

On Sun, Jun 19, 2005 at 02:31:30PM +0200, Torsten Veller wrote:
> Please don't assign bugs of packages in the tree to maintainer-needed.
> 
> Proposal: Bugs for packages in the tree where bugwranglers are not able to find
>           a maintainer go to qa@g.o.

You mean new ebuilds would go to maintainer-needed@g.o and existing but
unmaintained ebuilds to qa@g.o?

Personally I'm most interested in an alias for bugs in packages that
are already in the tree, but don't have an active maintainer. 

Right now it's hard if not impossible to query for these bugs. 
New ebuild requests are quite easily listed by querying for 'enhancement', 
something with ebuild in the subject, assigned to bug-wranglers or any 
combination of the above.

>           Bump requests might be annoying, but i think it's still the best thing to do.

Huh?

Regards,
Maurice.

-- 
Maurice van der Pot

Gentoo Linux Developer   griffon26@gentoo.org     http://www.gentoo.org
Creator of BiteMe!       griffon26@kfk4ever.com   http://www.kfk4ever.com


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Final proposal: New alias maintainer-needed@g.o or some such (speak now or forever hold your peace ;) )

[Maurice van der Pot]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1250 bytes --]

Alright, so seemant, tove, jakub and I talked about it some more on irc
and it seems we've reached a consensus. This doesn't solve all problems,
but it's a first step. We can talk about the next step(s) later.


Two new aliases will be made that bugs can be assigned to:

  maintainer-needed@gentoo.org
    Used for packages that are already in the tree and that are in
    desperate need of a maintainer.

  maintainer-wanted@gentoo.org
    Used for newly submitted ebuilds that can be added to the tree if
    there is someone willing to step up and maintain it.

The former address will be owned by the QA people, which means that if
bugs are assigned to maintainer-needed, it does not concern bug-wranglers.
The QA team will handle issues related to maintainer-needed.

Now we will have both an easy way to query for these two categories of 
bug reports as well as a way to subscribe to any messages that concern 
them.

Regards,
Maurice.

P.S.: There will probably be another message to notify everyone when 
      this has been set up.

-- 
Maurice van der Pot

Gentoo Linux Developer   griffon26@gentoo.org     http://www.gentoo.org
Creator of BiteMe!       griffon26@kfk4ever.com   http://www.kfk4ever.com


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] maintainer-needed@g.o and maintainer-wanted@g.o now available for use

[Maurice van der Pot]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1050 bytes --]

On Mon, Jun 20, 2005 at 09:56:07PM +0200, Maurice van der Pot wrote:
> Two new aliases will be made that bugs can be assigned to:
> 
>   maintainer-needed@gentoo.org
>     Used for packages that are already in the tree and that are in
>     desperate need of a maintainer.
> 
>   maintainer-wanted@gentoo.org
>     Used for newly submitted ebuilds that can be added to the tree if
>     there is someone willing to step up and maintain it.

The above has now been implemented and bugs have been reassigned where
appropriate. Developers who were in the maintainer-needed alias (when still 
only that alias was present) are now listed in both.

> P.S.: There will probably be another message to notify everyone when 
>       this has been set up.

You guessed it. That's what you're reading. Please use the addresses as
intended.

Regards,
Maurice.

-- 
Maurice van der Pot

Gentoo Linux Developer   griffon26@gentoo.org     http://www.gentoo.org
Creator of BiteMe!       griffon26@kfk4ever.com   http://www.kfk4ever.com


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Final proposal: New alias maintainer-needed@g.o or some such (speak now or forever hold your peace ;) )

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 479 bytes --]

On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 02:30 +0200, Markus Nigbur wrote:
> - Developer Handbook (which really needs a section about how bugs are treated. 
> I always wanted to write up a draft when I find the time...)

The games team has a "Games Team Bugs FAQ" at games.gentoo.org that we
continue to update with new information.  Having a nice global one would
be cool, for sure.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead/QA Manager
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Final proposal: New alias maintainer-needed@g.o or some such (speak now or forever hold your peace ;) )

[Lance Albertson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 972 bytes --]

On Wed, 2005-06-15 at 20:49 +0200, Maurice van der Pot wrote:
> So I take it everybody who replied on this thread is in agreement that
> the creation of an alias (e.g. maintainer-needed@gentoo.org) would be
> the best solution and that it is upto the herd to choose between
> assigning the bug to the new alias and putting the herd on the cc and
> the other way around?
> 
> If this is introduced we need to record it somewhere. I'm not sure what
> would be the best place though.

I'll be more than happy to mv new-ebuilds maintainer-needed if seemant
likes the idea. Seems like the two should fit together fine. Let me find
seemant and see what he thinks since he's kind of in charge of
bug-wrangler stuff.

-- 
Lance Albertson <ramereth@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager

---
GPG Public Key:  <http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc>
Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1  4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742

ramereth/irc.freenode.net

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Final proposal: New alias maintainer-needed@g.o or some such (speak now or forever hold your peace ;) )

[Michael Cummings]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 719 bytes --]

If the response is favorable, can you shout it from the rooftops? I have more 
than a few "bugs" that could get better loving in the m-n world than sitting 
hidden under perl/mcummings in bugzilla.

On Thursday 16 June 2005 12:38 am, Lance Albertson wrote:
> I'll be more than happy to mv new-ebuilds maintainer-needed if seemant
> likes the idea. Seems like the two should fit together fine. Let me find
> seemant and see what he thinks since he's kind of in charge of
> bug-wrangler stuff.

-- 

-----o()o---------------------------------------------
Michael Cummings   |    #gentoo-dev, #gentoo-perl
Gentoo Perl Dev    |    on irc.freenode.net 
-----o()o---------------------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Maurice van der Pot]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 964 bytes --]

On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 07:15:13PM +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
> I think it logically fits better into having its own assignee. Most
> resolutions suggest that no further action is needed, I don't think this is
> the case here (remember we are talking about RESOLVED NEEDMAINTAINER...)

I guess I've already been corrupted by TEST-REQUEST, NEEDINFO, LATER and
REMIND. But I guess you're right that it's kinda strange.

> As well as that, people could add themselves to the email alias if they are
> interested.

Right, and it's better to have an e-mail address and get a message each
time a bug is filed for a package without a maintainer, than it is to
have to wade through a list of bugs you've already seen to find a few
new ones.

You've convinced me.

Maurice.

-- 
Maurice van der Pot

Gentoo Linux Developer   griffon26@gentoo.org     http://www.gentoo.org
Creator of BiteMe!       griffon26@kfk4ever.com   http://www.kfk4ever.com


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Lance Albertson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1397 bytes --]

On Mon, 2005-06-13 at 18:17 +0100, Daniel Drake wrote:
> Markus Nigbur wrote:
> > Anyway, as I've already said I'm the _currently_ the only active herd
> > member and simply cannot take the responsibility of about 100 new
> > packages.
> > Therefor I suggest introducing a new keyword to bugzilla's resolution
> > list, called NEEDMAINTAINER.
> > With this new keyword everyone could compile a list of currently
> > unmaintained packages and just take the ones he likes. Additionally this
> > would be a great opportunity for non-developers for starting their
> > carrier within Gentoo.
> 
> I like the concept but I think that a previous suggestion that was discussed
> here was better. The suggestion was to create a maintainer-needed@gentoo.org
> alias which bugs could be assigned to. The discussion was a while ago but I
> don't recall any negative points being raised.

A new-ebuilds alias was created on toucan few months back. I guess word
never got out (or seemant never setup the account on bugzilla). Perhaps
it would be better just to reassign bugs to that account instead of
making another resolution. 

Cheers,

-- 
Lance Albertson <ramereth@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager

---
Public GPG key:  <http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc>
Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1  4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742

ramereth/irc.freenode.net

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: New Bugzilla resolution: NEEDMAINTAINER

[Maurice van der Pot]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1014 bytes --]

On Mon, Jun 13, 2005 at 02:04:42PM -0500, Lance Albertson wrote:
> > I like the concept but I think that a previous suggestion that was discussed
> > here was better. The suggestion was to create a maintainer-needed@gentoo.org
> > alias which bugs could be assigned to. The discussion was a while ago but I
> > don't recall any negative points being raised.
> 
> A new-ebuilds alias was created on toucan few months back. I guess word
> never got out (or seemant never setup the account on bugzilla). Perhaps
> it would be better just to reassign bugs to that account instead of
> making another resolution. 

It's not just about new-ebuild bugs. Personally I'd even say it's not
about those bugs at all. maintainer-needed@gentoo.org would be useful
for packages like OpenAFS: plenty of bugs, no maintainer.

Maurice.

-- 
Maurice van der Pot

Gentoo Linux Developer   griffon26@gentoo.org     http://www.gentoo.org
Creator of BiteMe!       griffon26@kfk4ever.com   http://www.kfk4ever.com


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]