On Wed, Nov 22, 2006 at 02:08:12PM -0700, Steve Dibb wrote: > Hi guys, > > There are more than a few packages with missing metadata.xml in the > portage tree. I've setup my funky little QA website to report on which > ones fall in that category, and here is the list right here: > > http://spaceparanoids.org/gentoo/gpnl/qa.php?q=metadata > > I've spent the morning fixing up most of them, adding blank metadata.xml > to them and assigning [EMAIL PROTECTED] as the main > maintainer, which in hindsight was probably not the best approach (my > apologies). > > Anyway, either way, it would be nice to get the few remaining packages > cleaned up, and if one of your packages is on that list, please update > or create the metadata. > > I'll still be going through the rest of them and sorting out which ones > were last maintained by a dev that is now retired and continue assigning > them to maintainer-needed. > I think the most important thing about adding "empty" metadata.xml files with maintainer-needed as maintainer is that it _changes_ the package to be unmaintained by definition (that's what maintainer-needed means after all) and that we can't be sure that's actually true unless we spend a lot of time examining each package and asking potential maintainers if it's unmaintained.
So while I enjoy getting metadata cleaned up etc. I think it's important to think about exactly what we're doing before "fixing" up a lot of packages - in this case 300+ packages. You (all devs!) might even want to ask on -dev ML if it's a good idea before touching up a huge number of packages to make sure you don't change things in subtle, unintentional ways. Anyway, I appreciate you spending time on cleaning up the metadata.xml files even if it might not have been the best idea in hindsight. Regards, Bryan Østergaard -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
