[gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

[gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

[Alec Warner]

I propose a new QA subproject, the TreeCleaners.

This is a delicate subject for some developers, other developers don't 
care, and yet others want the cruft in the tree removed.  The Tree 
Cleaning project's main goal is to identify broken and unmaintained 
packages in the tree and either get them fixed or mask and remove them.

Criteria:
1.  Packages slated for removal must have no active maintainer.  This is 
accomplished by looking in the package's metadata.xml for the maintainer 
tag.  The maintainer tag must contain an active (non-retired) developer 
or team.  The tree cleaners will maintain a list of ebuilds assigned to 
maintainer-needed; this list may end up on the web similar to Debian's 
WNPP[1].  A package with missing metadata.xml is assumed to be unmaintained.

2.  Packages slated for removal must have open bugs filled against them. 
  It is not the policy of the QA team nor this subproject to remove 
packages because they have no maintainer.  There are plenty of 
completely working packages in the tree with no maintainer; we are not 
trying to remove those.

3.  Packages slated for removal with simple to fix bugs may be fixed by 
the tree cleaners if a project member elects to do so.  Many of the bugs 
are relatively minor ( depend fixes, revbumps, etc ) and could be done 
by someone given a bit of time.  This isn't meant as a means to 
perpetually keep crap in the tree, moreso that in some cases minor bugs 
against a package are not grounds for removal.

4.  Preferably packages slated for removal shall have a dead or 
unresponsive upstream.  An upstream that isn't interested in maintenance 
means more work for Gentoo in keeping the package up to date.  For 
packages that already lack a maintainer in Gentoo, a dead upstream means 
there is no developer and no upstream for a package; aka no one to do 
the work.  A dead upstream is not *required* however, crap ebuilds for 
packages with an active upstream are still valid to be removed if there 
are major bugs filed against them.

5.  Packages slated for removal shall have a last rites e-mail sent to 
the gentoo-dev mailing list.  There will be no packages disappearing 
randomly out of the tree due to the tree cleaner project members. 
Transparency is key here, both on bugs, in package.mask, and on the 
mailing list.  developers and users both need to know what is going on.

6.  Packages slated for removal shall have a 30 day period in 
package.mask prior to removal.  This is tree cleaner policy, and it's 
one that I hope other developers will adopt.  I've seen things pmasked 
and removed after a week, a "couple of days", or just pmasked and never 
removed.  The 30 day period allows everyone using the package to see the 
masking message and the corresponding bug when they use portage.

Questions and Comments are welcome, as always.

-Alec Warner

[1] http://www.debian.org/devel/wnpp/
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

[Henrik Brix Andersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 451 bytes --]

On Sat, Jun 03, 2006 at 10:43:39AM -0400, Alec Warner wrote:
> Questions and Comments are welcome, as always.

Sounds like it will be a lot of work - but it a job that really needs
to be done on a regular basis, imho. I would be happy to see such a
subproject being launched.

The rules you stated in your email sounds good to me.

Regards,
Brix
-- 
Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 213 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

[Mark Loeser]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 548 bytes --]

Alec Warner <antarus@gentoo.org> said:
> I propose a new QA subproject, the TreeCleaners.

> Questions and Comments are welcome, as always.

This has my support.  Hopefully it will help us get rid of a lot of
cruft that hasn't been touched in ages and doesn't even work.

Thanks,

-- 
Mark Loeser   -   Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86)
email         -   halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
                  mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web           -   http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/
                  http://www.halcy0n.com

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

[Mike Doty]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Alec Warner wrote:
> I propose a new QA subproject, the TreeCleaners.
[snip]

+1 on this idea

- --
=======================================================
Mike Doty                      kingtaco -at- gentoo.org
Gentoo/AMD64 Strategic Lead
Gentoo Developer Relations
Gentoo Recruitment Lead
Gentoo Infrastructure
GPG: 0094 7F06 913E 78D6 F1BB  06BA D0AD D125 A797 C7A7
=======================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEgb0X0K3RJaeXx6cRAoC0AJ4lDDWuihZQn6WO/PRqK8SWp9iM/QCeMtdK
S+XxHe9L0Ll99Pjvl+9kmnk=
=cIXB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

[Stefan Cornelius]

+1 from me, too. I also want to offer my help to this project, so ping
me if needed.

Kind regards,

DerCorny

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

[Jan Kundrát]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 281 bytes --]

Alec Warner wrote:
> The maintainer tag must contain an active (non-retired) developer
> or team.

Minor wording issue - what about "...developer or a properly functional
team"? Just in case all members of the team die...

Cheers,
-jkt

-- 
cd /local/pub && more beer > /dev/mouth

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 258 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: QA subproject, TreeCleaners

[Duncan]

Alec Warner <antarus@gentoo.org> posted 4481A01B.6090609@gentoo.org,
excerpted below, on  Sat, 03 Jun 2006 10:43:39 -0400:

> 6.  Packages slated for removal shall have a 30 day period in 
> package.mask prior to removal.  This is tree cleaner policy, and it's 
> one that I hope other developers will adopt.  I've seen things pmasked 
> and removed after a week, a "couple of days", or just pmasked and never 
> removed.  The 30 day period allows everyone using the package to see the 
> masking message and the corresponding bug when they use portage.

What about changing this to "a minimum 30 day period after dev-list
last rites notification prior to removal, a minimum 3 day period between
dev-list notification and masking, and a minimum 2 week period in
package.mask."

The idea should be obvious, provide a bit of time after notification
before masking, as anyone stepping up in this period will minimize
disruption to the tree, while maintaining a reasonable post mask period
and a minimum 30 day overall period.

This is based on the various notifications and varied timings I've seen
here, as the proposal in general seems to be as well.  Both would
standardize things a bit, but this change would minimize disruption to the
tree if someone stepped up before masking.

Either way, good idea; a betterment of Gentoo, I agree.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

[Josh Saddler]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Alec Warner wrote:
> [...]
Gets my vote. Good idea. :)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEhFG6rsJQqN81j74RAsO1AKCybk+IHs6Bta0Jj/ZCoo2UP3YqZACeNLms
bJowAD/7a9ukWOzX+qPVcAo=
=a6gy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

[Eldad Zack]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 556 bytes --]

On Saturday 03 June 2006 17:43, Alec Warner wrote:
> I propose a new QA subproject, the TreeCleaners.

Great initiative! I'm all for it.

For a sidenote, If it is possible, can a unmaintained repo be created for 
removed packages? If an interested developer comes along the day some time 
later, and the ebuild is untrivial, it can be a time-saver starting from the 
last version at some cases - especially if the ebuild was punted because of 
security issues.

-- 
Eldad Zack <eldad@gentoo.org>
Key/Fingerprint at pgp.mit.edu, ID 0x96EA0A93

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 200 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 564 bytes --]

On Tuesday 06 June 2006 00:12, Eldad Zack wrote:
>  If an interested developer comes along the day some time
> later, and the ebuild is untrivial, it can be a time-saver starting from
> the last version at some cases - especially if the ebuild was punted
> because of security issues.
That's why we use a SCM for managing the ebuilds: the removed ebuilds are 
still found via cvs commands and on sources.gentoo.org

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://farragut.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org/
Gentoo/Alt lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

[Peter Volkov (pva)]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 311 bytes --]

On Втр, 2006-06-06 at 00:17 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> That's why we use a SCM for managing the ebuilds: the removed ebuilds
> are still found via cvs commands and on sources.gentoo.org 

But how can I search for removed ebuild in cvs? Is there any quick way
for such things?

Peter.

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

[Simon Stelling]

Peter Volkov (pva) wrote:
> But how can I search for removed ebuild in cvs? Is there any quick way
> for such things?

Use "site:sources.gentoo.org <package>" as query, e.g.

http://www.google.ch/search?q=site%3Asources.gentoo.org+sonar&btnG=Suche&meta=

-- 
Kind Regards,

Simon Stelling
Gentoo/AMD64 Developer
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] QA subproject, TreeCleaners

[Alec Warner]

Peter Volkov (pva) wrote:
> On Втр, 2006-06-06 at 00:17 +0200, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> 
>>That's why we use a SCM for managing the ebuilds: the removed ebuilds
>>are still found via cvs commands and on sources.gentoo.org 
> 
> 
> But how can I search for removed ebuild in cvs? Is there any quick way
> for such things?
> 
> Peter.

I am still thinking about hosting the ebuilds in an overlay somewhere, 
but yeah the ebuilds will be in the Attic, if/when we migrate to 
something !CVS, Attic migrates with us.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list