From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NpPwq-0006EZ-B0 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:43:59 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5B8ECE0DF8; Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:43:54 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5141E0DD4 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:43:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.3] (f052100001.adsl.alicedsl.de [78.52.100.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D89401B4060 for ; Wed, 10 Mar 2010 17:43:45 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4B97DA4F.2080309@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:43:43 +0100 From: Sebastian Pipping User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.8) Gecko/20100310 Thunderbird/3.0.3 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday? References: <4B971B38.3070907@gentoo.org> <201003100735.32850.vapier@gentoo.org> <20100310144159.GV30005@halcy0n.com> In-Reply-To: <20100310144159.GV30005@halcy0n.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: f3e615ed-6e1c-4cb7-9bb7-1c4a57423204 X-Archives-Hash: 0293e6453b3328436fca7ab3d68248ce On 03/10/10 15:41, Mark Loeser wrote: > I don't even think the maintainer-needed ones should be bumped. Who > knows what bugs you are introducing into the tree. This is why things > eventually get treecleaned. I purposely wrote "no big deal _to their maintainers_" - I wonder why everyone is so scare about their packages getting touched now :-) The requirements for touching packages shall be as on any other day. For maintainer-needed I wouldn't make such a strong cut, though. > As Mike said, for ones with maintainers, don't touch them unless you > have explicit permission. We have maintainers for a reason, and if you > don't know the intricacies of the package, you shouldn't be touching it. > You should know how it works, how to test it, and what the normal > problems of a bump are. Right. As you say it this way: we have maintainers for another reason too: so someone keeps the package up to date. It's both a right and a duty. > With that being said, I don't really see the point of a bumpday. These > day ideas are ignoring the fact that we don't have enough active developers, > which is the real problem. I assume that many half-active developers would be more active if they were motivated stronger. Bumpday could be another step to reactivate existing developers. But yes, we need more developers. Sebastian