From: Dan Meltzer <parallelgrapefruit@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: ROX: maintainer-wanted and apps out of date
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 15:26:26 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <46059ce1050912122677c3f85e@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200509122053.32423.carlo@gentoo.org>
The problem is, trying to fix ebuilds in tree is a lot more
complicated.. You have to fight with multiple herds, and multiple
developers, and explain to them why it should occur, in order to get
anything to happen.. In addition, even a global gigantic one liner to
add quotes to $D and $S would cause huge rsync loads... which makes
the mirror admins hate you... Combine this with the first issue, and
just improving the incoming ebuilds and hoping that the devs watching
this list pay attention, and make some of these changes in newly added
ebuilds, will improve the quality of the tree slowly.
If a user submits an ebuild, they should be prepared to make fixes to
bring it up to a standard. Many of the ebuilds do not even follow
ebuild-submit.xml, and the maintainer fixing them only causes more
problems for other maintainers further down, assuming the user submits
multiple ebuilds. Once they learn the rules, later ebuilds will
hopefully be up to the same standards.
On 9/12/05, Carsten Lohrke <carlo@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Monday 12 September 2005 19:56, Jakub Moc wrote:
> > Since you said above, that you really don't care if those user-submitted
> > ebuilds will ever get into portage or will stay in maintainer-wanted
> queue
> > forever and that's the stuff in portage that actually matters QA-wise,
> I'm
> > missing why are you worried about people not submitting their ebuilds any
> > more.
>
> Two points:
>
> 1. The biggest share of maintenance isn't getting an ebuild right, but the
> ongoing effort keeping it up to date, applying patches, interact with
> upstream developers, test, stabilize,... To me it absolutely doesn't matter,
>
> if an ebuild is broken or not before taking into account to maintain it.
>
> 2. People are interested in applications, but may not have the skills or
> interest to get an ebuild 100% perfect. WONTFIX will look like PISSOFF for
> them. I think we just look a bit petty-minded.
>
>
> > At the very least, reviewing user-submitted ebuilds and marking things
> > WONTFIX/CANTFIX/REVIEWED makes it possible to filter out the outdated and
> > dead-upstream crap, as well as things about which those people who filed
> > the bugs don't care any more. And, if someone picks those ebuilds up and
> > decides to maintain them, he can focus more on testing the actual app
> then
> > fixing a broken ebuild (or even committing a broken ebuild into the
> tree).
>
> As I said: Ebuilds in Portage should be reviewed before you think about
> those
> in bugzilla.
>
>
> Carsten
>
>
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-09-12 19:32 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-09-11 13:58 [gentoo-dev] ROX: maintainer-wanted and apps out of date Peter Hyman
2005-09-11 15:50 ` Maurice van der Pot
2005-09-11 16:42 ` Peter Hyman
2005-09-11 19:24 ` Maurice van der Pot
2005-09-11 21:02 ` Alin Nastac
2005-09-12 0:10 ` Aron Griffis
2005-09-12 7:04 ` Alin Nastac
2005-09-12 0:14 ` Peter Hyman
2005-09-12 0:25 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2005-09-12 0:38 ` Alec Warner
2005-09-12 11:55 ` Carsten Lohrke
2005-09-12 14:03 ` Chris Gianelloni
2005-09-12 14:26 ` Re[2]: " Jakub Moc
2005-09-12 14:28 ` Maurice van der Pot
2005-09-12 15:41 ` Peter Hyman
2005-09-12 16:12 ` Martin Schlemmer
2005-09-12 17:00 ` Peter Hyman
2005-09-12 17:12 ` Jan Kundrát
2005-09-12 17:25 ` Stephen P. Becker
2005-09-12 17:51 ` Chris Gianelloni
2005-09-12 17:03 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2005-09-12 17:32 ` Carsten Lohrke
2005-09-12 17:40 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2005-09-12 17:56 ` Re[2]: " Jakub Moc
2005-09-12 18:53 ` Carsten Lohrke
2005-09-12 19:21 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2005-09-13 0:20 ` Nathan L. Adams
2005-09-12 19:26 ` Dan Meltzer [this message]
2005-09-12 0:27 ` Stephen P. Becker
2005-09-12 0:36 ` Peter Hyman
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=46059ce1050912122677c3f85e@mail.gmail.com \
--to=parallelgrapefruit@gmail.com \
--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