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 1Q3xTW-0007Qv-FP for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 21:26:18 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 236221C058; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 21:26:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wy0-f181.google.com (mail-wy0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 084281C035 for ; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 21:25:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by wyi11 with SMTP id 11so2365479wyi.40 for ; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 14:25:35 -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 :content-transfer-encoding; bh=1xDbuuO7puqyNjXC43WbFODZ7yRF5FZq4L2J+xtrkxk=; b=IX8SBAkbD5sEMATqFBfdwmIl+WAq1LNajxK1HehyGw8omEtXQiilHMLNVsnQsDh1sr Yfvv6vLOU4WALcX5cLPOf8Nv2sgxBUr7mDb7v40/EWVfAJYwj9dKXNVvR/4oCSri9O/T IXKmsyLsNzbBOuZRK/aen7DIH4VhdGYO4A3S4= 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 :content-transfer-encoding; b=loc9ueBmX4CmxBEDN7UX4Wk8QvCZd0MHrMuUCIm8evdBvyKnnPIraCaJwvXALGmN9J gWfqAGdJtd0WuvThZLdNFpCQu93MeOMy4G8c7jXr8U96fWH5tGGBLhYynapeafQ9qKft u56ye9ilaQWTzAMsPfwwhlIjURV2267X5fb60= Received: by 10.216.168.67 with SMTP id j45mr1957739wel.101.1301261135114; Sun, 27 Mar 2011 14:25:35 -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 14:25:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20110326055210.E906D20054@flycatcher.gentoo.org> <4D8EC104.4090503@gentoo.org> <4D8F3BE8.5050300@gentoo.org> From: Nirbheek Chauhan Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 02:55:14 +0530 X-Google-Sender-Auth: B9QcgbLAx7yYHz7oWKgr__EI0Vo 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: Alec Warner Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 6870138e930b6e08b8a91fa63da5f05e On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Alec Warner wrote: > On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Nirbheek Chauhan w= rote: >> 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. =C2=A0I also dispute your manpower > logic. =C2=A0Gentoo has been short on developers for years. =C2=A0I 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.' =C2=A0Thats why there were a set > of criteria for removal. =C2=A0Maybe they changed their mind and you can > convince them. Well, I bet that more than half of them retired or stopped being active. >=C2=A0Ignoring people's opinions because they are whiners > and you are Treecleaners is a thin edge to walk though; so I'd be > careful. >=C2=A0At 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.) > =C2=A0I 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 =E2=80=94 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. =C2=A0If no one is using a packag= e > 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. =C2=A0Do we still have m-w these days? > "very poorly" meant "maintainers ignoring bugs for years", or empty herds. We have plenty of both. --=20 ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team