From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D66491381F3 for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 18:55:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 485A4E06B3; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 18:55:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ob0-f181.google.com (mail-ob0-f181.google.com [209.85.214.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CD8A6E05EF for ; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 18:54:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ob0-f181.google.com with SMTP id oi10so4121104obb.40 for ; Tue, 04 Dec 2012 10:54:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=tcYXf9RV33HMXMNb3Lc2U3YOoG1RKwyHEaSz4VY/R7M=; b=CN8KWh6TJHzJGPwvH0J7a2QDv0CssKj6jTzmoXwVGwvqOhtLaRpQFMMa0o2F2W9JFk qd8Fv4wAF7y9HiAz8QN6NC+Iq3NwQfSihUzbuLnanlnFCZYUimEr31JHIG9tGMhN+LyK oYktPWN0P2gPnV3ybaaVH3w7MNKRceNgO1q1U2Ibm0/ueuAQrP333QzSbWXuutt3PMw7 WhZe4mfTxhYS2BkXxVyLJ7a9R29MpBubB1L0vRK/uKE0t0P0dnKkiBntiQFNzgfqt1ep 4iAkZmcO8+1uWrMr1mObA6IhlfNmptb4MtYuCWfB9mpQLkzqv2LxFs4UrJqTVcg4qIPK fT7g== 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 Received: by 10.182.98.19 with SMTP id ee19mr8470990obb.90.1354647294957; Tue, 04 Dec 2012 10:54:54 -0800 (PST) Sender: markos.chandras@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.28.169 with HTTP; Tue, 4 Dec 2012 10:54:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <50BB71DD.4080308@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2012 18:54:54 +0000 X-Google-Sender-Auth: QvGAEAd9f1Y38uNFQYm83sJvxhg Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] introduce a soft-limit policy for changing other developers ebuilds From: Markos Chandras To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: ab2eb8ec-96f0-4329-a4ef-601b7a9899c4 X-Archives-Hash: 63998ba12c9faaa0afbf01ceced8de15 On 4 December 2012 15:42, Alec Warner wrote: > On Tue, Dec 4, 2012 at 1:19 AM, Markos Chandras wrote: >> On 4 December 2012 01:18, Ben de Groot wrote: >>> On 3 December 2012 03:30, Markos Chandras wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> On Dec 2, 2012 6:09 PM, "Rich Freeman" wrote: >>>> > >>>> > On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 10:21 AM, hasufell wrote: >>>> > > Only question is now what is a sane soft limit, before you go on and >>>> > > fix >>>> > > stuff. >>>> > > From a discussion in #gentoo-dev we thought 2-4 weeks depending on the >>>> > > severity of the bug is fine. Ofc this should exclude major changes or >>>> > > delicate packages from base-system/core/toolchain. >>>> > >>>> > Seems reasonable - I'd say 2 weeks is plenty. Of course, if the >>>> > maintainer explicitly rejects the change in a posting on the bug, then >>>> > it is hands off without some kind of escalation. Non-maintainers who >>>> > are concerned about a package can always step up to maintain, as long >>>> > as it involves real commitment. >>>> > >>>> > Oh, and on a side note Markos raises a valid point on the bug about >>>> > whether the devmanual is a good place for policy. The problem is that >>>> > I'm not sure we really have a good place, especially with the ebuild >>>> > docs gone in favor of the devmanual now. >>>> > >>>> > Rich >>>> > >>>> >>>> Maybe adding some bits here[1] is preferred instead of the devmanual. >>>> Unless we agree to make devmanual a technical and non-technical document, >>>> which I personally don't like because it will end up being huge without some >>>> sort of indexing/search textbox for quick queries. >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=2&chap=2 >>> >>> >>> In my opinion we should limit the amount of places where we document >>> policies and best practices. I suggest we keep only devmanual and PMS as >>> authoritative documents. >>> >>> In that case we should go forward and add these kind of policies to the >>> devmanual. >>> >>> -- >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Ben | yngwin >>> Gentoo developer >>> Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin >> >> As I said, the only drawback is that devmanual will become huge and >> without a proper "search" functionality, it will be a real pain to >> search >> for something quickly. Especially for new developers who are not >> familiar with how devmanual is structured. > > "site:devmanual.gentoo.org " > > Works in bing, I tried it! > It likely works in any modern search engine. > I don't quite like depending on external resources to index our documentation. But I guess there is no alternative at the moment -- Regards, Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2