Tuesday 19 Jan 2016 00:44:49, NP-Hardass wrote : > 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. > > 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. > > 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). > > 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. > > 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
More food for thought on the topic of "what do we do with maintainer-wanted packages". NP-Hardass I quite like your idea but what about clearing down the massive queue of reports assigned to maintainer-wanted first? Right now, the number of bug reports assigned to maintainer-wanted amounts to over 4k: http://tiny.cc/maintainer_wanted There's literally a slew of reports we can mark as WONTFIX / OBSOLETE because, well, some of these bugs are over 10 years old (!) and a lot of projects have stalled / are dead by now / or the industry has moved on. It has to be done at some point anyway so better now than later. And the upside is that it doesn't require ebuild skills or knowing Gentoo by heart: only clicking links and checking whether projects are still alive. What do you think? -- Patrice Clement Gentoo Linux developer http://www.gentoo.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
