[gentoo-dev] maintainer-wanted bugcount

[gentoo-dev] maintainer-wanted bugcount

[Markus Ullmann]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1036 bytes --]

Hi fellows,

when taking a look at the open bug count for bugs assigned to
maintainer-wanted (2450 at the time of writing), it seems pretty obvious
that we really can't handle all of them, at least not without growing at
least two dozen devs to maintain it properly.

As I highly doubt this will happen within a week, we have to make a
decision how to proceed with this stuff. So what options do we have?
These come to mind:

a) WONTFIX them within 4 or 8 weeks without picking them up
b) reassign them to herds (some herds are on CC) and have them
   respond withing 4-8 weeks and give a yey or boo.
c) let interested users move it to sunrise (some of them are there)
   so that the ebuilds are at least at our QA level we maintain for
   gentoo-x86 and are there to be picked up by devs if they're
   interested

If you have more options or comments, I'd like to hear about them, as we
definitely have to do something there.
F'up is set to gentoo-project as this is more a political thing.

Greetz
-Jokey



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] maintainer-wanted bugcount

[Andrey Falko]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2646 bytes --]

On Nov 26, 2007 4:46 AM, Markus Ullmann <jokey@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Hi fellows,
>
> when taking a look at the open bug count for bugs assigned to
> maintainer-wanted (2450 at the time of writing), it seems pretty obvious
> that we really can't handle all of them, at least not without growing at
> least two dozen devs to maintain it properly.
>
> As I highly doubt this will happen within a week, we have to make a
> decision how to proceed with this stuff. So what options do we have?
> These come to mind:
>
> a) WONTFIX them within 4 or 8 weeks without picking them up
> b) reassign them to herds (some herds are on CC) and have them
>   respond withing 4-8 weeks and give a yey or boo.
> c) let interested users move it to sunrise (some of them are there)
>   so that the ebuilds are at least at our QA level we maintain for
>   gentoo-x86 and are there to be picked up by devs if they're
>   interested
>
> If you have more options or comments, I'd like to hear about them, as we
> definitely have to do something there.
> F'up is set to gentoo-project as this is more a political thing.
>
> Greetz
> -Jokey
>
>
> Hi everyone,

I did the "Collective Maintenance" project this summer:
http://code.google.com/soc/2007/gentoo/appinfo.html?csaid=2881CA66D3587EA2

My vision was to move things in to a direction where the "maintainer-wanted"
packages would be collectively maintained without the need for a specific
herd or maintainer. To get to this vision, I set out to create a web
interface that would allow work to be coordinated in an organized,
efficient, and by-demand manner. Here is where I am currently at with that
interface: http://afalko.homelinux.net/tskdemo/

I think the current state of the interface is not going to allow for enough
organization. My fear is that it will turn into an unnavigable
dumping-ground when a lot of tasks/"maintainer-wanted" bugs are added to the
list. I am one year from earning at B.S. degree in Industrial Engineering
and my requirement this school year is to complete an IE design project. I
was able to get a group of four together to work on redesigning the
interface. My group members have been generating some excellent ideas so
far. I am optimistic that the end product will allow my vision to be
achieved. I will push to get the interface ready before the end of May 2008.

So in sum, I guess you can add a fourth option to the list: wait until the
end of May 2008 for the completion/deployment of an interface for
collectively maintaining packages. Or even a fifth option: use the current
interface right now and upgrade in May 2008 to a re-designed revision.

Best regards,
Andrey Falko

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3155 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] maintainer-wanted bugcount

[Robin H. Johnson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 770 bytes --]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 10:46:12AM +0100, Markus Ullmann wrote:
> As I highly doubt this will happen within a week, we have to make a
> decision how to proceed with this stuff. So what options do we have?
> These come to mind:
d) In addition to c), keep them open, flagged with sunrise in the status
   board, so that when a developer does want some package not in the
   tree, they can search first.
e) Encourage existing developers to review and commit this stuff more
   often.

I really would not want to see them closed unless there is a good reason
for them to not be committed to the tree.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy
E-Mail     : robbat2@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 321 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: maintainer-wanted bugcount

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 641 bytes --]

Robin H. Johnson wrote:

> d) In addition to c), keep them open, flagged with sunrise in the status
>    board, so that when a developer does want some package not in the
>    tree, they can search first.
> e) Encourage existing developers to review and commit this stuff more
>    often.
> 
> I really would not want to see them closed unless there is a good reason
> for them to not be committed to the tree.

++

-- 
                        looks like christmas at fifty-five degrees
                                    this latitude weakens my knees
    EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD  C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 (0xF9A40662)


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

[gentoo-dev] Re: maintainer-wanted bugcount

[Markus Ullmann]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 656 bytes --]

Robin H. Johnson schrieb:
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 10:46:12AM +0100, Markus Ullmann wrote:
> d) In addition to c), keep them open, flagged with sunrise in the status
>    board, so that when a developer does want some package not in the
>    tree, they can search first.

That's done already

> e) Encourage existing developers to review and commit this stuff more
>    often.
That would be the best option

> I really would not want to see them closed unless there is a good reason
> for them to not be committed to the tree.

See the reason's I've given here:
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/179

Greetz
-Jokey


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: maintainer-wanted bugcount

[George Shapovalov]

Monday, 26. November 2007, Markus Ullmann Ви написали:
> Robin H. Johnson schrieb:
> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 10:46:12AM +0100, Markus Ullmann wrote:
> > d) In addition to c), keep them open, flagged with sunrise in the status
> >    board, so that when a developer does want some package not in the
> >    tree, they can search first.
>
> That's done already
So what's the problem? 

The only onse where there is a valid issue, I think, are the ones where 
upstream has gone missing or no longer supports the package. (Even "better 
alternatives" thing is questionable IMHO. There are always people who have a 
different idea of better :)). These can be dealt with by having a dedicated 
force, perhaps comprised of people most annoyed by these bugs ;), who would 
simply scan the bugzilla for maintainer-wanted bugs, check the upstream and, 
if it is dead, close the bug with INVALID and a note of a dead upstream..

>
> > e) Encourage existing developers to review and commit this stuff more
> >    often.
>
> That would be the best option
Except the issue with all these packages is not committing but maintaining 
them. Sure, we could go on a committing spree and never touch any of these 
packages again. We even had such a situation at one point (rather long time 
ago) and it is specifically discouraged now.
The "really best" option would be recruiting new devs so that we have enogh 
people to maintain everything and add more, as was already suggested. This in 
fact does happen, it is just that the rate of new joins cannot be infinite 
plus we seem to experience our growing pains periodically..

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

[gentoo-dev] Re: maintainer-wanted bugcount

[Markus Ullmann]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 107 bytes --]

K, to sum it up then, everything stays like it is atm.

Thanks for your comments :)

Greetz
-Jokey


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: maintainer-wanted bugcount

[Daniel Drake]

Markus Ullmann wrote:
> K, to sum it up then, everything stays like it is atm.

I think that makes sense. Yes, it's unrealistic for us to be able to 
handle all of them, but I think that's a perfectly reasonable situation.

It's common for open source projects to have an excess of feature 
requests; it's a natural imbalance given that there are significantly 
more users than developers in almost all cases.

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