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 1Q3qGl-000345-0w for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 13:44:39 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7AF1C1C03A; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 13:44:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ww0-f53.google.com (mail-ww0-f53.google.com [74.125.82.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8B511C00B for ; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 13:43:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wwj40 with SMTP id 40so2722650wwj.10 for ; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 06:43:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=d5vremZWviqLKb96yLYiXxcttIZCsZFxkESf6Pf5uZc=; b=CsWm4EKAx1BDPj/O/p+yqtU/T5ZKxd7Zki8XMTikIo5ASwdPEoEZDjRU5Q6CM7wupE t9ClH9vkh2PzPVsYz6oIBXZNWhhN5gyF9mj7uwAAYuCbAR0+kvptq7GYOKpAf0otUGRC mpUcob+qH2Uvsv6NHbNACGcmcmSTPJiAPvIL4= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-type; b=DZQjCKCGXbi+5mJo86HXOyxVRZAfbIr8lUAC+IvUUKV+FzQZIR/ToiyUFDAPSpaKhY /360hCCxt1duzXiS+vdYaVL1QfRFu+Z/QgxtfzkT2ZQb5LwXykNdvfcoZEcojj8gCkeU hxZYgeWpkYjtOqc3EQ+lxUNpmJv6NSdUwJOBs= Received: by 10.216.221.16 with SMTP id q16mr2722535wep.71.1301233432103; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 06:43:52 -0700 (PDT) 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 Sender: nirbheek.chauhan@gmail.com Received: by 10.216.93.197 with HTTP; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 06:43:32 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4D8F3BE8.5050300@gentoo.org> References: <20110326055210.E906D20054@flycatcher.gentoo.org> <4D8EC104.4090503@gentoo.org> <4D8F3BE8.5050300@gentoo.org> From: Nirbheek Chauhan Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 19:13:32 +0530 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 7JJOqjZxzE32VcbDaiCDR9VbV4s Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-python/PyZilla: PyZilla-0.1.0.ebuild ChangeLog metadata.xml To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: Jeremy Olexa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 37e69203a655fa8490e98b6fc7e5990b On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Jeremy Olexa wrote: > On 03/27/2011 02:47 AM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: >> If you prohibit people from doing that, they'll just commit it >> normally, and then remove themselves a week later. > > Why does anyone need to *add* a package that is maintainer-needed? This is > one of the problems of the gentoo-x86 tree - too many maintainer-needed > packages. I'm just pointing out that if you prohibit that by policy, this is what people will do. The real problem is that maintainer-needed packages are allowed to remain in the tree *indefinitely*. >> I propose that we should be more aggressive about package.masking (for >> removal) all maintainer-needed packages from the tree by doing that >> one month after they become maintainer-needed. If someone doesn't >> volunteer to take care of it, it probably wasn't important anyway. >> > > That is abit extreme for me (read: I don't have motivation to fight the > flames), but I wouldn't complain if someone else did it to be honest. > Just start removing old[1] maintainer-needed packages. If people complain, tell them to start maintaining it. If they continue to complain, ignore them. As tree-cleaner, you have the power to do this and not take bullshit from people about it. 1. Set old as one month, with a 2 month package.mask duration before it's removed. -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team