hi,

how would be handled cases where you and me agreed that you will take care of pull requests on behalf of sound@ and proaudio@? and what if a package is maintained by multiple maintainers or even some maintainers and a project, each with a different preference? how that would be solved to not bring in some confusion? and how about maintainers that are not gentoo devs? and what if there are packages that have a maintainer that is mia but has the no-accept policy set and some other dev would like to fix a package that has an annoying bug (using a pull request by a contributor) as the reported maintainer is mia, or a contributor might want to maintain the package? and what if a maintainer wants pull requests just for some packages and not for others? and what if a pull request is referenced from a bug at bugzilla but the maintainer does not accept pull requests?

sorry for this flood of questions but atm it brings confusion to me :-) from my point of view and personal preference, i appreciate pull requests from contributors if those are of a decent quality, but for me it's hard to easily find out the relevant pull requests. with the new packages.gentoo.org it might be easier in the future but i'm not sure yet how reliable it is atm as for example the list of outdated packages for proaudio@ (https://packages.gentoo.org/maintainer/proau...@gentoo.org/outdated) does not seem to be updated or i misunderstood something. the same goes for the list of bugs (https://packages.gentoo.org/maintainer/proau...@gentoo.org/bugs) which seems to be missing some bugs as my list with "Assignee: proau...@gentoo.org" has 96 bugs atm compared to 76 bugs at packages.gentoo.org.

fordfrog


Dne 18. 08. 20 v 14:05 Joonas Niilola napsal(a):
Hey,

some of you may already have seen the new packages.gentoo.org page,
   https://packages.gentoo.org/

and the new maintainer pages in it,
   https://packages.gentoo.org/maintainers

If you open a maintainer page,
   https://packages.gentoo.org/maintainer/juip...@gentoo.org

you can see a tab called "pull requests" there,
   https://packages.gentoo.org/maintainer/juip...@gentoo.org/pull-requests

with description saying:
"If you also like to help the Gentoo project, you can consider sending a
Pull Request via GitHub.
Before doing so, you might want to take a look at the wiki page."

I'm suggesting of adding a new metadata flag to our Wiki's
User:/Project: page which then prints a message to this page saying
whether the maintainer (be it project or user), "accepts" or "deals
with" Github contributions. The wording can be a bit better, but it'd be
there to **notify** our **contributors** whether their time and effort
will most likely be wasted making a pull request for this particular
maintainer.

This note would then be displayed in every package the maintainer is
assigned to,
   https://packages.gentoo.org/packages/media-libs/rlottie/pull-requests

I'd imagine a simple switch in Wiki could do it. No need to add anything
to ::gentoo repo. The switch can be visible in User:/Project: page, but
it doesn't have to. Unspecified metadata flag would print something like
"This maintainer hasn't specified whether they handle Github pull
requests. If you wish to help using Github, please also open a bug prior
to that and link your pull request commit to that bug (add link to
glep-66 here)". Or just default it to "No."

Note that the bug text could always be displayed nevertheless, since
that is still the main channel to communicate with maintainers.

It's undeniable we get a lot of pull requests and unfortunate that many
are left without any attention to rot.
   https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pulls

I think this would serve both parties - devs and contributors, with
little to no cost.

-- juippis



Reply via email to