Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Last rites: obsolete acct-* packages

[Sam James <sam@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1959 bytes --]


Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> writes:

> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
>
> Florian Schmaus <flow@gentoo.org> writes:
>
>> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
>> On 18/07/2023 11.56, Sam James wrote:
>>> Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> writes:
>>> 
>>>> On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 4:27 PM Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>>>> Haven't we been keeping these because we still need to decide on a
>>>>>> policy about what to do with dead acct-*/* packages?
>>>>>
>>>>> Right. https://bugs.gentoo.org/781881 is still open. Flow could ping
>>>>> the QA team and ask if it should be closed, given the opinion there
>>>>> seems to be that there's no need to keep them, but I think it's wrong
>>>>> to do this pre-empting a policy decision, given it essentially forces
>>>>> the "don't keep them" path.
>>>>
>>>> The bug has been open for several months without comment. If a policy
>>>> were going to materialize, I think it would have happened by now.
>>>>
>>>> Forcing the issue by sending this last rites notice seems acceptable to me.
>>> Pinging someone rather than "forcing the issue" as a first-step is
>>> customary.
>>
>> I am sorry, but it seems that I have to clarify something.
>>
>> First, I have "pinged someone."
>
> Ping on IRC (in #gentoo-qa, or could PM me), or again on the bug?
>
> Someone asked the QA team to make a decision. We haven't yet, as I'd
> forgot about it. It seems wrong to then just pretend that didn't happen.
>
> At least try to get it resolved on that end by pinging again / asking us?

Just to be super duper clear: it's fine with me if we just move on and
don't keep the packages, but I think a quick /msg #gentoo-qa "hey guys,
nothing seems to be happening with the bug, do you mind if we just close
it?" wouldn't have gone amiss.

That is _all_ I'm asking for here.

And then when we get onto talk of "incentives" and "illegitimate shadow
policies", I become very confused indeed.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 377 bytes --]