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 1OQ2EZ-0006fz-27 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 17:53:35 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7FD48E0AA7; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 17:53:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A031BE0A81 for ; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 17:53:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.178.22] (p4FDF09F8.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [79.223.9.248]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A5191B40B7 for ; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 17:53:26 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4C1D03FF.8060204@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 19:53:03 +0200 From: Thomas Sachau 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] Re: Moving unmaintained packages to Sunrise References: <20100613104143.4f61dbe7@pomiocik.lan> <4C14EA92.4020008@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 OpenPGP: id=211CA2D4 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigB7CB9E5C45EE626A30545EAC" X-Archives-Salt: ae959e5c-f8ac-49ad-bf3b-8f2c82e6d456 X-Archives-Hash: 0995d4c26aa88152218c3d1cdb09f7dd This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigB7CB9E5C45EE626A30545EAC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Am 13.06.2010 22:36, schrieb Duncan: > Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto posted on Sun, 13 Jun 2010 14:26:26 +0000 as= > excerpted: >=20 >> there was a proposal to create a sunset overlay, like the java team us= ed >> and now kde uses as well. The purpose of this overlay would be to keep= >> the packages that are removed from the tree because they have no >> maintainers. As was discussed back then, the people wishing to work on= >> sunrise are likely not interested in having all the removed packages >> dumped in their shoulders. Besides, sunrise is about packages that hav= e >> an interested user submitting and hopefully maintaining ebuilds for ne= w >> packages, while sunset is likely to become a dumping ground for stuff >> that we can't find anyone to take care of. If we want to find a way to= >> not drop the maintainer-needed packages, I'd prefer we move them to >> sunset and not to sunrise. As this overlay is likely to become large, >> probably "huge", and as it will host security vulnerable packages, we >> should evaluate whether we really want to host it and, if so, what >> measures to take to protect "distracted users". I think package maskin= g >> all the packages put there with links to relevant bugs might be a firs= t >> step. >=20 > You obviously read the proposal differently than I did. MG can pop in = and=20 > say what he intended, but as I read it, and why I said "++", is... >=20 > We change the policy of sunrise, not to be a dumping ground for /all/ t= ree- > cleaned packages, but to allow interested users who see that a package = > they're interested in is unmaintained, to add it to (the unpublic part = of)=20 > sunrise before the package is removed and potentially before it's even = > masked for removal, such that it can be approved and ready to "go publi= c"=20 > in sunrise at the same time it's removed (or even when masked for remov= al)=20 > from the main tree. >=20 > So packages wouldn't be dumped there without a maintainer. The only on= es=20 > that would qualify would be those where a user actively proposes to=20 > maintain them in sunrise, the idea being that in some instances (as wit= h=20 > the posted example), they can be maintained better there than they can = be=20 > proxy-maintained in-tree. >=20 > Apparently, sunrise has been around long enough, now, that there has be= en=20 > at least one package that started in sunrise, was added to the tree, th= en=20 > the person who added it lost interest or retired... and now it's rottin= g=20 > in the tree, and the same user that put it in sunrise before is still=20 > interested in it and has updated ebuilds, etc, but can't easily get=20 > proxies to commit the new ebuilds to the tree. From my read, that was = > apparently what sparked the post and whole proposed change. >=20 I think, your proposed way is already possible. The policy of sunrise is = only to not dublicate packages in main tree. If they will surely be dropped and this fact can b= e seen in public, e.g. because of the announcement and mask, i have no problems with users joini= ng #gentoo-sunrise and maintaining that package in sunrise overlay. You should just remember, that those, who want to add the unmaintained pa= ckage to sunrise, should also plan to maintain it there, sunrise will not become a place to move b= roken packages to ;-) --=20 Thomas Sachau Gentoo Linux Developer --------------enigB7CB9E5C45EE626A30545EAC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) iJwEAQEKAAYFAkwdBAUACgkQG7kqcTWJkGf6NAQAm1WYCgh9QYjdR0L1QGQOo3Yp pY1JpvccaTZtofxLy0VPx/LFouukB4bEr2qOXiv/DxEJPFu/sz95Al6HcB4zgeCb hDXpK7jpESlNnJTHkzo3BPW4FqOgT5izPOiSRhHv6MesiX05w/FRfJoeye6fZWj7 3doMylZXJVTxGaoxfaE= =Bz7L -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigB7CB9E5C45EE626A30545EAC--