Re: [gentoo-dev] net-proxy herd is still looking for help (was: Re: [gentoo-dev] net-proxy herd is empty)
On 2013-09-01 16:01, Tom Wijsman wrote: On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 21:00:19 +0200 Pavlos Ratis daster...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 17:00:57 +0100 Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote: As wschlich no longer has enough time for that packages, this herd is now empty. If you want to help, please join the herd. If nobody joins, I will proceed with dropping it and moving its packages maintainer-needed letting everybody want the packages they prefer. Not joining until others join because I don't want to be the sole herd member, but I do want to help out with occasional bumps and such if there clearly is a case of lack of manpower. I'm also interested in stepping up as a maintainer for net-proxy/privoxy. I am interested in joining the herd. Now we can be 2 members. :) While I joined under the above premise to help out I have became the main maintainer but am unable to cover everything this herd does; Pavlos didn't have much time either to together cover everything. So, we currently have around 48 bugs open at the moment; there are also probably some versions bumps waiting as well, as well as some of the other maintaining tasks that possibly come along. If you want to help, please join the herd. If nobody joins, we will likely proceed with dropping it in a month and moving its packages to maintainer-needed letting everybody want the packages they prefer. Can be in as a proxied maintainer as net-proxy is something I'm interested in as other net- stuff. Another option is to combine the net herds together into a bigger net herd, as I have previously suggested; we might need to look into that.
[gentoo-dev] net-proxy herd is still looking for help (was: Re: [gentoo-dev] net-proxy herd is empty)
On Sun, 3 Mar 2013 21:00:19 +0200 Pavlos Ratis daster...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 6:16 PM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sun, 03 Mar 2013 17:00:57 +0100 Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote: As wschlich no longer has enough time for that packages, this herd is now empty. If you want to help, please join the herd. If nobody joins, I will proceed with dropping it and moving its packages maintainer-needed letting everybody want the packages they prefer. Not joining until others join because I don't want to be the sole herd member, but I do want to help out with occasional bumps and such if there clearly is a case of lack of manpower. I'm also interested in stepping up as a maintainer for net-proxy/privoxy. I am interested in joining the herd. Now we can be 2 members. :) While I joined under the above premise to help out I have became the main maintainer but am unable to cover everything this herd does; Pavlos didn't have much time either to together cover everything. So, we currently have around 48 bugs open at the moment; there are also probably some versions bumps waiting as well, as well as some of the other maintaining tasks that possibly come along. If you want to help, please join the herd. If nobody joins, we will likely proceed with dropping it in a month and moving its packages to maintainer-needed letting everybody want the packages they prefer. Another option is to combine the net herds together into a bigger net herd, as I have previously suggested; we might need to look into that. -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] net-proxy herd is still looking for help (was: Re: [gentoo-dev] net-proxy herd is empty)
On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Tom Wijsman tom...@gentoo.org wrote: If you want to help, please join the herd. If nobody joins, we will likely proceed with dropping it in a month and moving its packages to maintainer-needed letting everybody want the packages they prefer. Another option is to combine the net herds together into a bigger net herd, as I have previously suggested; we might need to look into that. I'd think twice before doing that. If there is a real synergy (common eclass use, need to manage deps and releases, etc) then it might make sense. Otherwise all you end up doing is delaying the inevitable, except this time with even a larger group of packages moving to maintainer-needed. Herds should be reasonably-sized, and they should be packages that make sense to maintain together - not just collections of packages that fit some theme. We already have categories. If maintainers aren't coordinating across a herd then better to just split it up. Note - I'm not calling for any dramatic changes here - if teams of maintainers are already working closely together by all means keep your herds. However, if a herd is just a dumping ground for packages that nobody really looks at, then it isn't being used properly. Rich
