Hopefully some comments from a user / power-user are welcome on this topic. Just my two cents, is all.

On Tue, Jan 19, 2016 at 12:35 PM, Alec Warner <antarus@gentoo.org> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 18, 2016 at 9:44 PM, NP-Hardass <NP-Hardass@gentoo.org> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

With all of the unclaimed herds and unclaimed packages within them, I
started to wonder what will happen after the GLEP 67 transition
finally comes to fruition.  This left me with some concerns and I was
wondering what the community thinks about them, and some possible
solutions.

There is a large number of packages from unclaimed herds that, at this
time, look like they will not be claimed by developers.  This will
likely result in a huge increase in maintainer-needed packages (and
subsequent package rot).  This isn't to say that some of these
packages weren't previously in a "maintainer-needed" like state, but
now, they will explicitly be there.

Speaking as the dude who founded the treecleaners project...all things die. Even software. While some may yearn for a software archive (nee, graveyard!), I put forth that the gentoo-x86 tree is not such a thing. Do not weep for the unmaintained packages that will be cleaned![1]
 

A possible approach to reducing this is to adopt some new policies.

The first of which is an "adopt-a-package" type program.  In
functionality, this is no different than proxy-maintenance, however,
this codifies it into an explicit policy whereby users are encouraged
to step and take over a package.  This obviously requires a greater
developer presence in the proxy-maint project (or something similar),
but, personally, I think that a stronger dev presence in proxy-maint
would be better for Gentoo as a whole.

I'm not sure what concrete proposal you are actually making here. Sure I'd love for users to actually maintain the software that they want in the tree. How do we encourage such behavior?
 

An explicit message to the effect of "This package doesn't have a maintainer, please help" would be a huge push for users like myself to pitch in. I write small ebuilds for my own projects from time to time, and occasionally copy official ebuilds into my own overlay to make changes. If I knew that there was a project that I used that wasn't getting any official attention, that would light a fire under any users with a similar mindset to my own.


The second policy change would be that maintainer-needed packages can
have updates by anyone while maintaining the standard "you fix it if
you break it" policy.  This would extend to users as well.  With the
increased ease that users can contribute via git/github, they should
be encouraged to contribute and have their efforts facilitated to ease
contributions to whatever packages they desire (within the
maintainer-needed category).

So how do user contributed changes land (the aforementioned proxy-maint team?)
 

This is the question that I wanted to address in my reply.

Prior to the Git migration, I would say "Yea, good luck there". But now it's incredibly easy for users to submit a pull request on the github mirror, or similar infrastructure.

I know that there has been a lot of debate on how to properly handle that, and I'm not sure if there was a resolution to that debate. Assuming that there was a resolution (Or will be), a hyperlink to an appropriate page for pull requests (or similar mechanism) would drastically increase the number of "regular users" who were willing to try their hand at contributing.

I think that, as a user, I'd recommend against asking people to file bugs on bugzilla with ebuilds attached. It's intimidating how many thousands of bugs there are, and new users might think that the bugzilla isn't actively used (even though it clearly is). Hopefully that suggestion doesn't cause too much bike-shedding.



Similar to the concept of a "bugday," coupled with above, an
"ebuildday" where users and devs get together so users can learn to
write ebuilds and for devs to work together to maintain packages that
usually fall outside their normal workload could prove beneficial to
the overall health of Gentoo packaging.

We used to have bugday. I presume the person running it stopped. Feel free to start it up again.
 

Once again, these are just some random musings inspired by recent
events on the dev ML, and thought it might be worth discussing.
I've cc'd proxy-maint as a lot of this discussion is likely to involve
them, and would like them to put in their official opinion as well.


- --
NP-Hardass
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=5UdF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----