Re: [gentoo-dev] Please consider removing use.stable.mask and package.use.stable.mask

[Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>]

On Thu, Nov 14, 2013 at 11:38 AM, Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I was particularly hit by this as maintainer of freetype, see bugs
> 455070 and 459352 for some of the mess that could have been avoided.

Looks like 455070 was the source of problems there (the other is just
a tracker with the aftermath).  The package had no maintainer at the
time, only a herd (per cvs).  There was a request in the bug for
whether it was suitable to deploy to production.  Somebody associated
with the herd gave a thumbs-up, apparently (I can only say that based
on your comment - I have no idea how that was communicated).  Then
something went wrong.  Since it caused problems, it was masked.  Those
who run ~arch should be thanked for saving the stable users from
potential breakage!

I'm not sure what should have been done differently.  If the package
maintainer (in this case a herd) says that something is good to go,
why would anybody assume that it wasn't?  You suggested testing in an
overlay 20 days earlier, but you weren't in any particularly
privileged position at the time (you were presumably just another
maintainer of the herd).

I'm not pointing fingers here.  This was apparently a
miscommunication, and part of the cause was a failure to document that
there was a primary maintainer of the package (something which was
subsequently corrected).  Michał did offer to just maintain the status
quo on that package instead of migrating it, and apparently he thought
he had the all-clear to migrate it anyway.

Michał did add the multilib project as a co-maintainer, taking
responsibility for dealing with the multilib-related issues long-term.
 In my mind this is the sort of things projects should do.

I'm sure there were other issues, but issues will happen when projects
make changes.  That's just the way things roll around here.  If Michał
just committed a change to a package without conferring with the
maintainer at all or giving significant notice, I'd feel differently.
I think we just need to learn and move forward, and from the looks of
things we have.  Gentoo always has been a fairly "disruptive" distro,
though it has settled down of late.  I don't think we're erring on the
side of breaking systems too often right now, though I'm always for
preventing that as long as it doesn't require ossification.

(Just a note - this is all based on what I could piece together from
cvs and bugzilla.  I'm sure those who were personally involved could
contribute more detail. I'm not sure it is necessary that do so, but
I'll gladly defer to those with firsthand knowledge.)

>> In the end, stuff only
>> gets done if people write code.  Your power in any FOSS project really
>> comes down to your ability to write code or convince others to write
>> code on your behalf.

> No, it's more about your ability to commit and get away with it.

So, I'm 100% for what Donnie said and in general I tend to lean
towards saying "thanks, but no thanks" when a heavy contributor is
driving everybody nuts.  However, the reality is that those who commit
more also tend to be allowed to get away with committing more.  That's
just human nature - we all like our free toys and we're reluctant to
take too much objection when we're slapped around a little by the guy
who is giving us the free toys.  There needs to be a balance, and from
the sound of things Markos is looking to step in and adjust the
balance if it gets out of line.  Honestly, I just wish everybody would
do what they can to make his job easier, and I say that without
pointing my fingers in any direction.  I think we have a really great
thing going here...

Rich