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 <gentoo-dev+bounces-40438-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1Ny5pO-0007JI-W0
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 03 Apr 2010 16:04:07 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D396AE0C12;
Sat, 3 Apr 2010 16:04:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-qy0-f180.google.com (mail-qy0-f180.google.com [209.85.221.180])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8923AE0BF6
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 16:03:46 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by qyk10 with SMTP id 10so45415qyk.26
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 03 Apr 2010 09:03:46 -0700 (PDT)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: antarus@scriptkitty.com
Received: by 10.229.46.11 with HTTP; Sat, 3 Apr 2010 09:03:45 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1270306756.18734.39.camel@homer.ob.libexec.de>
References: <1270305609.3243.0@NeddySeagoon>
<1270306756.18734.39.camel@homer.ob.libexec.de>
Date: Sat, 3 Apr 2010 09:03:45 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 177f596a15c3d39d
Received: by 10.229.99.143 with SMTP id u15mr545303qcn.105.1270310626011; Sat,
03 Apr 2010 09:03:46 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <n2jb41005391004030903n7364ad84i2f9f5cb9e129c352@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Is Gentoo dying?
From: Alec Warner <antarus@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Archives-Salt: 883f2da8-b3ea-4a9c-b645-8d51900e50f1
X-Archives-Hash: f5b6492ea02228f99c4d1c9f608304f0
On Sat, Apr 3, 2010 at 7:59 AM, Tobias Scherbaum <dertobi123@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 03.04.2010, 15:40 +0100 schrieb Roy Bamford:
>> First, we need some metrics - the first step to controlling anything is
>> to measure it.
>
> So, how do you want to measure those metrics? I for one can't think of a
> useful algorithm which helps to identify understaffed or orphaned areas.
> Sure, one might take a look at the number of packages compared with open
> bugs for example - but in the end that still won't give you some useful
> metrics.
When I was a treecleaner I tended to look at a few things; note that
because we enforce very little in the tree these are basically just a
set of heuristics.
- metadata.xml: how many packages are maintainer-{needed,wanted}.
Does not apply to all herds because some herds fix anything in their
herd.
- date of last commit: Gentoo is fast moving and packages that
haven't had commits since 200{4,5,6} are probably old, unmaintained
and may not even compile or run.
- date of last listed maintainer commit versus last commit:
Basically if the maintainer hasn't touched the ebuild in a while but
someone else (herd members?) have, the metadata.xml is probably out of
date.
The above are all pretty easy to do with the data in the tree. Some
other useful ideas might be:
- compare open bugs for the package, when was the last bug for a
package closed (bugs data kinda sucks for this)
- for a given package in a herd, check the version in the tree
against freshmeat or similar to see how far behind it is (I think
someone wrote something for this already, exherbo?)
- check imlate to see if keywording is behind (is the maintainer
filing stablereqs?)
Metrics do not have to be perfect (they never are...) but they may
shine some light on some areas of the tree that need staff.
-A
>
> If someone has a feeling somewhere helping hands are missing or an area
> is orphaned - that's the best "metrics" we can get.
>
> - Tobias
>
> --
> Praxisbuch Nagios
> http://www.oreilly.de/catalog/pbnagiosger/
>
> https://www.xing.com/profile/Tobias_Scherbaum
>