From: "Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" <zerochaos@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] introduce a soft-limit policy for changing other developers ebuilds
Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 03:10:10 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <50BDAFE2.6000702@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <50BB71DD.4080308@gentoo.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 12/02/2012 10:21 AM, hasufell wrote:
> As I was told in my recruiting process we usually don't just fix up
> ebuilds of other devs unless it's trivial, very severe or something.
>
> The usual process is nothing new: try to contact the maintainer, open a
> bug, set a deadline when you will go and fix yourself.
>
> Only question is now what is a sane soft limit, before you go on and fix
> stuff.
>>From a discussion in #gentoo-dev we thought 2-4 weeks depending on the
> severity of the bug is fine. Ofc this should exclude major changes or
> delicate packages from base-system/core/toolchain.
>
> I tried to document that a bit:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=445402
>
> any objections? This is nothing new, just a clarification of already
> existing policy and a reminder.
>
>
If we are going to document this policy and make it official (which
since it's not documented it's not official) then it only makes sense to
have an opt-out option. I personally don't wish to see my users suffer
for 2-4 weeks because I'm busy and people are pretending to be polite.
I have no issue with this policy, but to do it without an explicit
option to opt-out is not acceptable to me. I would suggest something in
the metadata.xml under the maintainer section. We could have a specific
maintainer section : <maintainer><name>help welcome></name></maintainer>
or a specific tag to put under our own maintainer section
<maintainer><name>Rick Farina</name><demeanor>just fix it</demeanor></name>
I currently, and will continue to maintain a completely open policy on
my packages. To write in the rules that this is not acceptable would be
more than rude.
Thanks,
Zero
PS> I don't actually mean for either of those suggestions to be used
mind you, it's just an example.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/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=ZBY6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-12-04 8:09 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-12-02 15:21 [gentoo-dev] introduce a soft-limit policy for changing other developers ebuilds hasufell
2012-12-02 15:38 ` Rich Freeman
2012-12-02 19:30 ` Markos Chandras
2012-12-04 1:18 ` Ben de Groot
2012-12-04 7:43 ` Ian Whyman
2012-12-04 9:19 ` Markos Chandras
2012-12-04 15:42 ` Alec Warner
2012-12-04 18:54 ` Markos Chandras
2012-12-06 10:53 ` Ben de Groot
2012-12-04 8:10 ` Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina [this message]
2012-12-04 9:23 ` Markos Chandras
2012-12-04 16:01 ` Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
2012-12-04 17:06 ` Proxy maintainers in metadata.xml (was Re: [gentoo-dev] introduce a soft-limit policy for changing other developers ebuilds) Diego Elio Pettenò
2012-12-04 17:28 ` Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
2012-12-04 18:35 ` Sergey Popov
2012-12-04 18:48 ` Diego Elio Pettenò
2012-12-04 18:51 ` Markos Chandras
2012-12-06 11:02 ` Ben de Groot
2012-12-06 13:28 ` Markos Chandras
2012-12-06 15:27 ` Peter Stuge
2012-12-06 15:54 ` Ian Stakenvicius
2012-12-06 16:04 ` Peter Stuge
2012-12-06 19:07 ` Markos Chandras
2012-12-08 17:48 ` Jeroen Roovers
2012-12-04 17:01 ` [gentoo-dev] introduce a soft-limit policy for changing other developers ebuilds hasufell
2012-12-04 17:17 ` Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
2012-12-04 17:32 ` hasufell
2012-12-04 17:46 ` Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
2012-12-04 18:17 ` hasufell
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=50BDAFE2.6000702@gentoo.org \
--to=zerochaos@gentoo.org \
--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