[gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

Hello!


We have about 500 bump request open at the moment:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=bump

I assume that quite a few of them would be no big deal to their
maintainers in Gentoo.


Bugday is occupying the first Saturday of the month: how about bumpday
on the third Saturday of the month?  First bumpday could be March 20th,
10 days from now.

What do you think?



Sebastian

Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[Nathan Zachary]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 704 bytes --]

On 09/03/10 22:08, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> Hello!
>
>
> We have about 500 bump request open at the moment:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=bump
>
> I assume that quite a few of them would be no big deal to their
> maintainers in Gentoo.
>
>
> Bugday is occupying the first Saturday of the month: how about bumpday
> on the third Saturday of the month?  First bumpday could be March 20th,
> 10 days from now.
>
> What do you think?
>
>
>
> Sebastian
>
>   
Not sure that my opinion matters all that much as I'm not currently
doing ebuild work, but I think this idea could really help out the
status of the tree.  Attached to it could be a stabilisation day as well.

--Nathan Zachary

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1143 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[Joshua Saddler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1523 bytes --]

On Tue, 09 Mar 2010 22:32:22 -0600
Nathan Zachary <nathanzachary@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 09/03/10 22:08, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> >
> > We have about 500 bump request open at the moment:
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=bump
> >
> > I assume that quite a few of them would be no big deal to their
> > maintainers in Gentoo.
> >
> >
> > Bugday is occupying the first Saturday of the month: how about bumpday
> > on the third Saturday of the month?  First bumpday could be March 20th,
> > 10 days from now.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> >
> >
> > Sebastian
> >
> >   
> Not sure that my opinion matters all that much as I'm not currently
> doing ebuild work, but I think this idea could really help out the
> status of the tree.  Attached to it could be a stabilisation day as well.
> 
> --Nathan Zachary

The ones that I'm CCed on, either as proxy maintainer or because I have some other interest, I prolly would mind. They're not simple revbumps, but they have dependency changes and/or other complicated changes, which is the only reason why they're still open. My bugs can't be solved with a simple rename-and-commit.

I'm prolly not the only one who feels this way, so you really need to pick your bugs carefully! Otherwise we'll end up with another screwed-up mess like the one we just went through with patrick.

Bumpdays are otherwise a good idea, though I'm not sure why we need a separate day for that in addition to our standard bugdays.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 03/10/10 06:00, Joshua Saddler wrote:
> I'm prolly not the only one who feels this way, so you really need to pick your bugs carefully!

Agreed, yes.


> Bumpdays are otherwise a good idea, though I'm not sure why we need a separate day for that in addition to our standard bugdays.

While bugday is also meant to activate developers it's primarily focused
on users fixing bugs, making them able to do that and doing proxy commits.

I guess a developer doing the bump himself is much faster than waiting
for and working with a user on that.  It would help to teach users but
it would work against the goal of getting all the bump requests closed.

Also, another day means one more day a month with people working on
Gentoo theoretically.



Sebastian

Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 595 bytes --]

On Tuesday 09 March 2010 23:08:24 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> We have about 500 bump request open at the moment:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=bump
> 
> I assume that quite a few of them would be no big deal to their
> maintainers in Gentoo.
> 
> 
> Bugday is occupying the first Saturday of the month: how about bumpday
> on the third Saturday of the month?  First bumpday could be March 20th,
> 10 days from now.
> 
> What do you think?

for the maintainer-needed ones, np.  for the ones with maintainers, i think 
you need an ack from someone first.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[Ben de Groot]

On 10 March 2010 06:17, Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 03/10/10 06:00, Joshua Saddler wrote:
>> Bumpdays are otherwise a good idea, though I'm not sure why we need a separate day for that in addition to our standard bugdays.
>
[...]
> Also, another day means one more day a month with people working on
> Gentoo theoretically.

I think it would be better to have it all happen on the same day. If those
are easy bumps, they fit very well with bugday. And those devs who
want to work on that, can then join the general bugday mayhem. ;-)
You might be spreading things too thinly otherwise. And even for the
more involved bumps it could be handy to have users around for
testing.

Cheers,
-- 
Ben de Groot
Gentoo Linux developer (qt, media, lxde, desktop-misc)
______________________________________________________

Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[Mark Loeser]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1477 bytes --]

Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> said:
> On Tuesday 09 March 2010 23:08:24 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> > We have about 500 bump request open at the moment:
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=bump
> > 
> > I assume that quite a few of them would be no big deal to their
> > maintainers in Gentoo.
> > 
> > 
> > Bugday is occupying the first Saturday of the month: how about bumpday
> > on the third Saturday of the month?  First bumpday could be March 20th,
> > 10 days from now.
> > 
> > What do you think?
> 
> for the maintainer-needed ones, np.  for the ones with maintainers, i think 
> you need an ack from someone first.

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.

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.

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.

-- 
Mark Loeser
email         -   halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
email         -   mark AT halcy0n DOT com
web           -   http://www.halcy0n.com

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[Markos Chandras]

On Wednesday 10 March 2010 16:41:59 Mark Loeser wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> said:
> > On Tuesday 09 March 2010 23:08:24 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> > > We have about 500 bump request open at the moment:
> > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=bump
> > > 
> > > I assume that quite a few of them would be no big deal to their
> > > maintainers in Gentoo.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Bugday is occupying the first Saturday of the month: how about bumpday
> > > on the third Saturday of the month?  First bumpday could be March 20th,
> > > 10 days from now.
> > > 
> > > What do you think?
> > 
> > for the maintainer-needed ones, np.  for the ones with maintainers, i
> > think you need an ack from someone first.
> 
> 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 run occasionally the maintainer-needed list and bump those packages ( and 
YES I try to do proper bumps not just renaming the ebuilds ), so yes 
maintainer-needed package could get some love as well :)


-- 
Markos Chandras (hwoarang)
Gentoo Linux Developer
Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org

Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[Gilles Dartiguelongue]

Le mardi 09 mars 2010 à 22:32 -0600, Nathan Zachary a écrit :
> On 09/03/10 22:08, Sebastian Pipping wrote: 
> > Hello!
> > 
> > 
> > We have about 500 bump request open at the moment:
> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=bump
> > 
> > I assume that quite a few of them would be no big deal to their
> > maintainers in Gentoo.

For gnome assigned bumps, I can tell all of them have a reason/policy
that explains why they are not done yet and I definitively don't want
non-maintainer bumps for them.

> Not sure that my opinion matters all that much as I'm not currently
> doing ebuild work, but I think this idea could really help out the
> status of the tree.  Attached to it could be a stabilisation day as
> well.

That I would buy. I often hear users complaining that stable isn't that
stable and they try to mix ~arch or completely move to ~arch instead of
asking for stablereq. Here too gnome has a policy for some packages but
a couple of them can be stabilized independently. Either way the
reaction is generally quick.

-- 
Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@gentoo.org>
Gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[Alec Warner]

On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 6:41 AM, Mark Loeser <halcy0n@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> said:
>> On Tuesday 09 March 2010 23:08:24 Sebastian Pipping wrote:
>> > We have about 500 bump request open at the moment:
>> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=bump
>> >
>> > I assume that quite a few of them would be no big deal to their
>> > maintainers in Gentoo.
>> >
>> >
>> > Bugday is occupying the first Saturday of the month: how about bumpday
>> > on the third Saturday of the month?  First bumpday could be March 20th,
>> > 10 days from now.
>> >
>> > What do you think?
>>
>> for the maintainer-needed ones, np.  for the ones with maintainers, i think
>> you need an ack from someone first.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>

We have plenty of developers, the problem is we have too many packages ;p

-A

> --
> Mark Loeser
> email         -   halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org
> email         -   mark AT halcy0n DOT com
> web           -   http://www.halcy0n.com
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iD8DBQFLl6+3CRZPokWLroQRAp07AKDgqdRi1gWsIp0wG+QLIaYEXss5OwCdHNZ6
> Owj8ESEixDWVN03OwJV53EQ=
> =F2pI
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>

Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 03/10/10 14:59, Ben de Groot wrote:
> I think it would be better to have it all happen on the same day. If those
> are easy bumps, they fit very well with bugday. And those devs who
> want to work on that, can then join the general bugday mayhem. ;-)
> You might be spreading things too thinly otherwise. And even for the
> more involved bumps it could be handy to have users around for
> testing.

Testing is a point, easy bumps are a point to.
The thing is bugday will soon not be thin anymore: it will require all
the attention of all online devs: there weill be no time to do bumps
that need your brain in parallel.  To summarize: we have to allow Gentoo
to grow or it won't.



Sebastian

Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[Ben de Groot]

On 10 March 2010 19:50, Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 03/10/10 14:59, Ben de Groot wrote:
>> I think it would be better to have it all happen on the same day.

> The thing is bugday will soon not be thin anymore: it will require all
> the attention of all online devs: there weill be no time to do bumps
> that need your brain in parallel.

If and when that happens, we can reevaluate and adjust accordingly.
Until such time, it will be easier to have developers commit to one
set day a month rather than two.

Cheers,
-- 
Ben de Groot
Gentoo Linux developer (qt, media, lxde, desktop-misc)
______________________________________________________

[gentoo-dev] Re: How about a monthly bumpday?

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1051 bytes --]

On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:41:59 -0500
Mark Loeser <halcy0n@gentoo.org> wrote:

> 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.

And if you're already getting the maintainer to take the time to review your
work and make sure it doesn't break anything they might as well be doing the
bump themselves.

That said, I think there's still a case for taking action yourself if you
can't get a response out of the maintainer within a reasonable time and the
bump is necessary (ie. fixes a real problem, not just because there's a newer
version out).


-- 
fonts,                                            by design, by neglect
gcc-porting,                              for a fact or just for effect
wxwidgets @ gentoo     EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[Peter Volkov]

В Срд, 10/03/2010 в 05:08 +0100, Sebastian Pipping пишет:
> How about a monthly bumpday?

Good idea, but it should follow our policy to inform maintainers _in
advance_: e.g. on first bumpday to work on bumps and notify maintainer
about this work by attaching final ebuild to the version bump bug with
clear message that you are going to bump and, _next month_ on bumpday
it's Ok to commit this ebuild to the tree. Just picking bugs and bumping
them straight to the tree without knowing why maintainer haven't done
that yet is a bad idea.

-- 
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?

[Sebastian Pipping]

On 03/19/10 13:36, Peter Volkov wrote:
> В Срд, 10/03/2010 в 05:08 +0100, Sebastian Pipping пишет:
>> How about a monthly bumpday?
> 
> Good idea, but it should follow our policy to inform maintainers _in
> advance_: e.g. on first bumpday to work on bumps and notify maintainer
> about this work by attaching final ebuild to the version bump bug with
> clear message that you are going to bump and, _next month_ on bumpday
> it's Ok to commit this ebuild to the tree. Just picking bugs and bumping
> them straight to the tree without knowing why maintainer haven't done
> that yet is a bad idea.

Agreed.  However, am I the only one who wouldn't start doing an ebuild
_before_ okay or timeout?  Chances are too high to work for the trashcan.

I recommend a plain post of this text to an affected bug:

  I hereby request this bug and package to be opened to non-maintainer
  bumps.  Unless this bug is closed before April's bumpday (2010-04-17)
  or any of the maintainer objects I may take the liberty of bumping
  this package from April's bumpday on.



Sebastian