[gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February
Mike Frysinger wrote: This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically the 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @ irc.freenode.net) ! If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even vote on, let us know ! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole Gentoo dev list to see. GLEP46, as discussed on Januar 21-24. I'd say it's ready. The only minor thing is where to keep the list of available tags. As far as I understood neysx we should keep it in metadata.dtd itself. Cheers, Tiziano -- Tiziano Müller Gentoo Linux Developer Areas of responsibility: Samba, PostgreSQL, cpp, Python E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG FP : F327 283A E769 2E36 18D5 4DE2 1B05 6A63 AE9C 1E30 -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February
On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 19:59 +0100, Tiziano Müller wrote: GLEP46, as discussed on Januar 21-24. I'd say it's ready. The only minor thing is where to keep the list of available tags. As far as I understood neysx we should keep it in metadata.dtd itself. http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0046.html for anybody wanting to know what GLEP49 entails. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Games Developer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February
On Monday 05 February 2007, Chris Gianelloni wrote: On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 01:06 -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: Reply-to I've already completed this, I just haven't figured out exactly where it needs to be committed. I'm guessing somewhere in the developer handbook. Anyway, where should I send this so it'll be done? File a bug? would it be more appropriate in the infra project ? -mike pgp8ex4H6yYdI.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February
Mike Frysinger wrote: This is your monthly friendly reminder ! Same bat time (typically the 2nd Thursday at 2000 UTC), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @ irc.freenode.net) ! Reply-to and SPF docs? Isn't this the third month now? Also the infra doc on dev email still says not to use d.g.o as a relay server. I can't remember if this was first brought up in a council meeting or on core though. Just a friendly poke. ;) -- by design, by neglect dirtyepic gentoo orgfor a fact or just for effect 9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB3 5B2D E625 A073 8379 37E8 (0x837937E8) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February
On Monday 05 February 2007, Ryan Hill wrote: Reply-to and SPF docs? Isn't this the third month now? I might be counting wrong, as last time I wasn't there, but it might be the fourth, counting the original one. -- Diego Flameeyes Pettenò - http://farragut.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org/ Gentoo/Alt lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, Sound, ALSA, PAM, KDE, CJK, Ruby ... pgpmvWvwee2ZP.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February
Kevin F. Quinn wrote: It would but having some kind of deadline after which you are for example free to take over the package if you want to would be nice. That's going too far; there's certainly no need to take over a package just to get a fix in. If you want to take over a package, asking the current maintainer has to be the first step, not to quietly wait for a timeout then just grab it. Similarly asking the current maintainer if they mind you putting a fix in. That's of course a given. I think the question here relates to non-responsive maintainers or herds. I have been in the situation many many times with gcc-porting where I file a bug with a simple patch (say removing extra qualification) to get a package to build with GCC 4.1, and get no response for months from the maintainer despite multiple pings. In that case, i'll apply the fix myself. I always try to wait a month or more before going ahead and always ping at least once. So far i've not received any major complaints, but i'm just waiting for the day someone will get territorial about their packages and decide rip me a new one. It'd be nice to have some kind of asshole insurance. This also affects things like treecleaners. How long does a herd team or maintainer have to be unresponsive to warrant the package falling into maintainer-needed? Right now the most common way we find these packages is when Jakub gets annoyed enough with the accumulating bugs and lack of response to CC us. ;P I personally think that for bug fixes a month is a long enough wait to allow someone to respond. Keep in mind that's to respond, not to fix the bug. A simple yep, i'll get to this later is enough. -- by design, by neglect dirtyepic gentoo orgfor a fact or just for effect 9B81 6C9F E791 83BB 3AB3 5B2D E625 A073 8379 37E8 (0x837937E8) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for February
On Sat, 03 Feb 2007 14:04:49 -0600 Ryan Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kevin F. Quinn wrote: It would but having some kind of deadline after which you are for example free to take over the package if you want to would be nice. That's going too far; there's certainly no need to take over a package just to get a fix in. If you want to take over a package, asking the current maintainer has to be the first step, not to quietly wait for a timeout then just grab it. Similarly asking the current maintainer if they mind you putting a fix in. That's of course a given. I think the question here relates to non-responsive maintainers or herds. Well, this thread didn't start with MIA devs (which is what you're talking about), it started with devs being too slow to take action. I wouldn't have a standard timeout (far too regulatory) - just apply common sense and do what needs to be done. I have been in the situation many many times with gcc-porting where I file a bug with a simple patch (say removing extra qualification) to get a package to build with GCC 4.1, and get no response for months from the maintainer despite multiple pings. In that case, i'll apply the fix myself. I always try to wait a month or more before going ahead and always ping at least once. So far i've not received any major complaints, but i'm just waiting for the day someone will get territorial about their packages and decide rip me a new one. It'd be nice to have some kind of asshole insurance. Well, my experience so far has been that provided you fix stuff decently (both technically and politically ;) ), people don't mind Maintainers can always tweak later if they prefer a different solution. If things get antsy, there's always devrel to mediate. One obvious point, is to check a dev's away status if they're not responding, before diving in. This also affects things like treecleaners. How long does a herd team or maintainer have to be unresponsive to warrant the package falling into maintainer-needed? Right now the most common way we find these packages is when Jakub gets annoyed enough with the accumulating bugs and lack of response to CC us. ;P I personally think that for bug fixes a month is a long enough wait to allow someone to respond. Keep in mind that's to respond, not to fix the bug. A simple yep, i'll get to this later is enough. -- Kevin F. Quinn signature.asc Description: PGP signature
