From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6FA1F158004 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 13:59:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0529C2BC051; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 13:59:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (mail.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C3F062BC015 for ; Tue, 12 Sep 2023 13:59:04 +0000 (UTC) References: <7802203.lOV4Wx5bFT@kona> <20230911082243.65aa85f5@Akita> <4128737.ElGaqSPkdT@kona> <20230911084231.73dd619f@Akita> <5848191c-8708-edfe-0c69-eeced3907b0d@gmail.com> <87zg1szc23.fsf@gentoo.org> <5d96d41de2f7057b42b436783678c8c4.squirrel@ukinbox.ecrypt.net> <87zg1sxu88.fsf@gentoo.org> <6aca04641c105c3fc72910fdbb7b6c01.squirrel@ukinbox.ecrypt.net> <877cowxs1c.fsf@gentoo.org> User-agent: mu4e 1.10.6; emacs 30.0.50 From: Sam James To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] last rites: sys-fs/eudev Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2023 14:57:47 +0100 Organization: Gentoo In-reply-to: Message-ID: <87sf7jwl0b.fsf@gentoo.org> 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 X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Archives-Salt: af9fe672-7e21-4fca-b2f6-a4346acbc721 X-Archives-Hash: d10cb2e94e3ecc5d80570ae7fbd2904b "Eddie Chapman" writes: > Sam James wrote: >> >> "Eddie Chapman" writes: >>>>> So what's the situation with the current Gentoo maintainers? Have >>>>> they disappeared? I often see on here packages being offered up for >>>>> grabs. Why >>>>> hasn't there been a call to give others the opportunity to volunteer >>>>> as maintainers rather than going straight to last riting the package? >>>>> Or >>>>> has that happened and I've missed it, in which case I apologise. >>>> >>>> There was a year ago or so and nothing really came out of it. But see >>>> above wrt 'tags'. >>> >>> A year is a long time, there might well now be people willing to take >>> over maintaining it that were not willing to 1 year ago, if that is what >>> is required. >> >> They have a month to step up anyway, although that will involve >> upstream activity too. > > I see there was already a change in the tree yesterday that assumes > sys-fs/eudev is going (commit d46677fd864b30315423c8364ca44db2de98e2a1, > sys-fs/mdadm/mdadm-4.2-r2, amd64 stable keyworded). Has this actually been > decided behind the scenes already? This starts to smell a little ugly > unless I've completely misunderstood something. I hope I'm wrong. I think someone just didn't want to bother waiting to clean it up there given it's unlikely anyone will bother taking it over. It's not exactly something which can't be undone. > > One thing I don't understand: the Gentoo project page for eudev lists 4 > members including the lead, and FWICT they are mostly still active in > other areas of Gentoo (recent commits to the tree in other packages). The > project lead is also an original author of eudev. blueness being the same person who wrote the news item last year saying it's dead and it no longer serves a purpose. > I find it hard to > believe that all 4 of these people have completely lost interest in eudev > in Gentoo. Have any of these 4 maintainers publicly said (anywhere) that > they are not interested in being maintainers anymore (which is fine if > that is the case)? We're not talking here about a lone maintainer of some > peripheral package that's disappeared leaving an orphaned package. > That happened really with the discussion w/ blueness et. al when it was last-rited (or before it was last-rited) originally.