Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-python/PyZilla: PyZilla-0.1.0.ebuild ChangeLog metadata.xml

[Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek@gentoo.org>]

On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Alec Warner <antarus@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Sure, that's the history. But what made sense back then doesn't make
>> sense now. Back then we didn't have 600+ packages that no one
>> maintains, and whose bugs go almost entirely unread. We had crazy
>> amounts of manpower back then.
>
> We probably had more than 600 unmaintained packages because no one was
> removing dead packages from the tree.  I also dispute your manpower
> logic.  Gentoo has been short on developers for years.  I don't see
> how 2011 is any different than 2007 in this aspect.
>

The current problem is burnt-out or semi-active devs who commit
occasionally, but aren't able to help with any herd-related work
because they're out of touch. As such, their presence in the team
gives a false indication of strength. This problem was much less
severe in 2007 (afair).

>>
>> As we evolve, the responsibilities of the different parts of Gentoo
>> also evolve. As such, the tree-cleaners project has evolved, and if
>> the team isn't allowed to clean the tree, then why do we even have it
>> anymore?
>
> The community got pissed when I deleted unmaintained packages from the
> tree 'just because it was unmaintained.'  Thats why there were a set
> of criteria for removal.  Maybe they changed their mind and you can
> convince them.

Well, I bet that more than half of them retired or stopped being active.

> Ignoring people's opinions because they are whiners
> and you are Treecleaners is a thin edge to walk though; so I'd be
> careful.


> At least during my tenure there were still hundreds of
> unmaintained and broken packages; so I didn't much care about
> unmaintained but working stuff (since there was plenty of work to do.)
>  I would argue the tree is still in a similar state.
>

The fun part is that we really don't even know in what state those
packages are w.r.t. runtime issues. I know that deigo's tinderbox
keeps track of compile-time issues *extremely* well, but we have zero
runtime testing.


>> I really don't understand *why* people want to keep around
>> unmaintained packages. If a package is not maintained, we should come
>> up and say it outright. Trying to maintain the illusion of maintenance
>> is really bad — for each person reporting a bug about a package, 100
>> people who got that same bug don't report it at all. So what happens
>> when there are just 50 users for some packages? Half the time we won't
>> even know that one of them is broken[1]. The rest of the time, users
>> will get a bad impression of Gentoo saying "Man, half the packages
>> don't even work".
>
> Properly tagged I don't think there is any illusion.
> Maintainer-needed is maintainer-needed after all.

The problem is that from the PoV of the user, everything in the tree
is "official". After all, that's how all the distros function.

> So launch gstats and get usage numbers.  If no one is using a package
> that is a keen indicator it can be punted; however no one will get off
> their ass and get more data to back anything up (myself included...)

If we launch gstats *today*, it'll take us at least a long time before
we get decent numbers, and even after that, those numbers will be
biased towards those people who are really active in following Gentoo
news and developments. Unlike Firefox's usage stats, we have no way of
prompting pre-existing gentoo installations with a "Do want to take
part in gstats?" question.

> All of your points above assume we have a decent metric of 'how many
> users a package has' and about the only way we know that is when users
> file bugs for it (version bump, bug, feature req, etc..)
>

Yes. But we have another (more reliable) way: p.mask it and wait for
people to complain.

>>
>> We all like to boast about how gentoo has 15,000 packages, but we
>> neglect to mention that more than 1000 of these are either
>> unmaintained or very poorly maintained. And this is a very
>> conservative number.
>
> But again this is all made up...m-n was 670-odd packages last I
> checked.  Do we still have m-w these days?
>

"very poorly" meant "maintainers ignoring bugs for years", or empty
herds. We have plenty of both.

-- 
~Nirbheek Chauhan

Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team