From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1GnCcD-0007m0-Oz for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 23 Nov 2006 11:19:38 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id kANBIlXp013828; Thu, 23 Nov 2006 11:18:47 GMT Received: from mtai01.charter.net (mtai01.charter.net [209.225.8.181]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id kANBFFSG020709 for ; Thu, 23 Nov 2006 11:15:16 GMT Received: from aa01.charter.net ([10.20.200.153]) by mtai02.charter.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20061123105650.SSPF1481.mtai02.charter.net@aa01.charter.net> for ; Thu, 23 Nov 2006 05:56:50 -0500 Received: from [192.168.0.106] (really [71.80.182.211]) by aa01.charter.net with ESMTP id <20061123105650.VPUF1515.aa01.charter.net@[192.168.0.106]> for ; Thu, 23 Nov 2006 05:56:50 -0500 Message-ID: <45657E71.2030104@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 02:56:49 -0800 From: David Shakaryan User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.8 (X11/20061116) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml References: <4564BC3C.1080008@gentoo.org> <20061122232934.GS12483@woodpecker.gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <20061122232934.GS12483@woodpecker.gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed X-Chzlrs: 0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by robin.gentoo.org id kANBIlZj013828 X-Archives-Salt: 90377886-8ca7-4119-81ad-c7a6906f6918 X-Archives-Hash: e08c2623931215df6efeb9c746173940 Bryan =C3=98stergaard wrote: > On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 02:08:12PM -0700, Steve Dibb wrote: >> Hi guys, >> >> There are more than a few packages with missing metadata.xml in the=20 >> portage tree. I've setup my funky little QA website to report on whic= h=20 >> ones fall in that category, and here is the list right here: >> >> http://spaceparanoids.org/gentoo/gpnl/qa.php?q=3Dmetadata >> >> I've spent the morning fixing up most of them, adding blank metadata.x= ml=20 >> to them and assigning maintainer-needed@gentoo.org as the main=20 >> maintainer, which in hindsight was probably not the best approach (my=20 >> apologies). >> >> Anyway, either way, it would be nice to get the few remaining packages= =20 >> cleaned up, and if one of your packages is on that list, please update= =20 >> or create the metadata. >> >> I'll still be going through the rest of them and sorting out which one= s=20 >> were last maintained by a dev that is now retired and continue assigni= ng=20 >> them to maintainer-needed. >> > I think the most important thing about adding "empty" metadata.xml file= s > with maintainer-needed as maintainer is that it _changes_ the package t= o > be unmaintained by definition (that's what maintainer-needed means afte= r > all) and that we can't be sure that's actually true unless we spend a > lot of time examining each package and asking potential maintainers > if it's unmaintained. I see what you mean here, but asking potential maintainers doesn't seem=20 like too much of a solution, as it would take a lot of time and energy.=20 In my opinion, if the package is actually maintained, then it shouldn't=20 be hard for the maintainer to fix the metadata, adding himself as the=20 maintainer or at least assigning it to a herd. --=20 David Shakaryan GnuPG Public Key: 0x4B8FE14B --=20 gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list