Re: [gentoo-dev] masking and removing *coin packages

[Tuomo Hartikainen]

On 2016-07-08 08:10, james wrote:
> On 07/08/2016 05:17 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 20:30:36 -0400 Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> I emailed the list some time ago about giving away a bunch of bitcoin
> >> forks to see if anyone was interested in taking them.  I didn't get any
> >> feedback so as of tomorrow I'll be masking the following for removal in
> >> 30 days.
> >
> > Any reason for mask and removal? Are these packages broken?
> > Just drop them to maintainer-needed.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew Savchenko
> >
> 
> Perhaps we should start posting these  orphaned-package announcements to 
> gentoo-user, so folks interested in learning about ebuilds can ponder 
> proxy-maintenance of a few packages as an opportunity?
> 
> 
> Surely there is a wider audience that will see some packages they like
> are going away because there are not enough maintainers, and thus 
> respond by 'stepping up' to maintain a few packages?

I would think those who are interested in (and capable of) maintaining
packages would already be subscribed to gentoo-dev.

-- 
Tuomo Hartikainen

Re: [gentoo-dev] masking and removing *coin packages

[William Hubbs]

On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 07:09:04PM +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 10:01:58 -0500 William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 08:10:07AM -0500, james wrote:
> > > On 07/08/2016 05:17 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 20:30:36 -0400 Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> > > >> Hi everyone,
> > > >>
> > > >> I emailed the list some time ago about giving away a bunch of bitcoin
> > > >> forks to see if anyone was interested in taking them.  I didn't get any
> > > >> feedback so as of tomorrow I'll be masking the following for removal in
> > > >> 30 days.
> > > >
> > > > Any reason for mask and removal? Are these packages broken?
> > > > Just drop them to maintainer-needed.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Andrew Savchenko
> > > >
> > > 
> > > Perhaps we should start posting these  orphaned-package announcements to 
> > > gentoo-user, so folks interested in learning about ebuilds can ponder 
> > > proxy-maintenance of a few packages as an opportunity?
> > 
> > I'm not sure that's necessary, that's what g-d-a is for.
> 
> How many users are subscribed to the gentoo-dev-announce ML? The
> very name suggests that this is development announce, not something
> related to our users.
> 
> We already duplicate Last-rites messages to gentoo-dev ML, why not
> add gentoo-user here too? Why do we need to duplicate Last-rites on
> gentoo-dev in the first place? I suppose there are two reasons:
> 
> 1) even not all devs are subscribed to gentoo-dev-announce;

They should be, the last I heard this list is mandatory for all devs.

> 2) this is a moderated list, which creates some delays.
 
 This might be a consideration, but I'm not sure.

I'm not really for adding another list we cross-post last rites
announcements to, I would rather encourage folks who want to keep track
of that to subscribe to g-d-a. That's also where the announcements for
council meetings go, etc.

William



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] masking and removing *coin packages

[Michał Górny]

On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 19:09:04 +0300
Andrew Savchenko  wrote:

> On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 10:01:58 -0500 William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 08:10:07AM -0500, james wrote:  
> > > On 07/08/2016 05:17 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:  
> > > > On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 20:30:36 -0400 Anthony G. Basile wrote:  
> > > >> Hi everyone,
> > > >>
> > > >> I emailed the list some time ago about giving away a bunch of bitcoin
> > > >> forks to see if anyone was interested in taking them.  I didn't get any
> > > >> feedback so as of tomorrow I'll be masking the following for removal in
> > > >> 30 days.  
> > > >
> > > > Any reason for mask and removal? Are these packages broken?
> > > > Just drop them to maintainer-needed.
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Andrew Savchenko
> > > >  
> > > 
> > > Perhaps we should start posting these  orphaned-package announcements to 
> > > gentoo-user, so folks interested in learning about ebuilds can ponder 
> > > proxy-maintenance of a few packages as an opportunity?  
> > 
> > I'm not sure that's necessary, that's what g-d-a is for.  
> 
> How many users are subscribed to the gentoo-dev-announce ML? The
> very name suggests that this is development announce, not something
> related to our users.
> 
> We already duplicate Last-rites messages to gentoo-dev ML, why not
> add gentoo-user here too? Why do we need to duplicate Last-rites on
> gentoo-dev in the first place? I suppose there are two reasons:
> 
> 1) even not all devs are subscribed to gentoo-dev-announce;
> 2) this is a moderated list, which creates some delays.

There is a significant difference between duplicating message 
to a post-only announcement list, and having it on two regular traffic
lists.


-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny



pgpslDVAkl0Sf.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] masking and removing *coin packages

[Anthony G. Basile]

On 7/8/16 10:42 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Anthony G. Basile  
> wrote:
>>
>> Also there's some debate in IRC about whether or not these packages
>> should be lastrited or dropped to maintainer-needed.  These forks are
>> not in good shape upstream, so I think it makes better sense to
>> p.mask/lastrite and then move them to the graveyard overlay when I
>> remove them from the tree in 30 days.
>>
> 
> IMO the criteria should be whether they work or not.  Not whether
> upstream is more or less active.

There is a QA against the current version of namecoin* and upstreams
newest packages are no good.

> 
> If they're blockers on other work, by all means cull them.  However,
> if the biggest problem with them is that they're using a few inodes in
> the repo, then they should probably stay.
> 

I have no strong feeling here, but I do want to get rid of them.  So I'm
okay with maintainer-needed@  I'll let the discussion continue for a bit
and then do whatever the consensus is.

-- 
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D.
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened]
E-Mail: bluen...@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP  : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB  DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA
GnuPG ID  : F52D4BBA

Re: [gentoo-dev] masking and removing *coin packages

[William Hubbs]

On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 08:10:07AM -0500, james wrote:
> On 07/08/2016 05:17 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 20:30:36 -0400 Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> I emailed the list some time ago about giving away a bunch of bitcoin
> >> forks to see if anyone was interested in taking them.  I didn't get any
> >> feedback so as of tomorrow I'll be masking the following for removal in
> >> 30 days.
> >
> > Any reason for mask and removal? Are these packages broken?
> > Just drop them to maintainer-needed.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew Savchenko
> >
> 
> Perhaps we should start posting these  orphaned-package announcements to 
> gentoo-user, so folks interested in learning about ebuilds can ponder 
> proxy-maintenance of a few packages as an opportunity?

I'm not sure that's necessary, that's what g-d-a is for.

William



signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] masking and removing *coin packages

[Andrew Savchenko]

On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 10:42:14 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Anthony G. Basile  
> wrote:
> >
> > Also there's some debate in IRC about whether or not these packages
> > should be lastrited or dropped to maintainer-needed.  These forks are
> > not in good shape upstream, so I think it makes better sense to
> > p.mask/lastrite and then move them to the graveyard overlay when I
> > remove them from the tree in 30 days.
> >
> 
> IMO the criteria should be whether they work or not.  Not whether
> upstream is more or less active.
> 
> If they're blockers on other work, by all means cull them.  However,
> if the biggest problem with them is that they're using a few inodes in
> the repo, then they should probably stay.
 
+1

Best regards,
Andrew Savchenko


pgpTATvMiWKjx.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] masking and removing *coin packages

[Rich Freeman]

On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Anthony G. Basile  wrote:
>
> Also there's some debate in IRC about whether or not these packages
> should be lastrited or dropped to maintainer-needed.  These forks are
> not in good shape upstream, so I think it makes better sense to
> p.mask/lastrite and then move them to the graveyard overlay when I
> remove them from the tree in 30 days.
>

IMO the criteria should be whether they work or not.  Not whether
upstream is more or less active.

If they're blockers on other work, by all means cull them.  However,
if the biggest problem with them is that they're using a few inodes in
the repo, then they should probably stay.

-- 
Rich

Fwd: Re: [gentoo-dev] masking and removing *coin packages

[Anthony G. Basile]

Okay,  I'll set the metadata.xml for both net-p2p/litecoin* and
sys-process/nmon to the following:


http://www.gentoo.org/dtd/metadata.dtd;>


marc.p...@sunny-computing.de
Marc Popp
Maintainer. Assign bugs to him


proxy-ma...@gentoo.org
Proxy Maintainers




Also there's some debate in IRC about whether or not these packages
should be lastrited or dropped to maintainer-needed.  These forks are
not in good shape upstream, so I think it makes better sense to
p.mask/lastrite and then move them to the graveyard overlay when I
remove them from the tree in 30 days.

I haven't acted yet, so there's still time to bikeshed ;)


On 7/8/16 4:32 AM, Marc Popp wrote:
> Hi Anthony,
> 
> I would take over the litecoin* packages, but my last (and first) request
> to take over nmon was not even approved it answered yet. I guess, I wasn't
> following the right process.
> 
> Thanks
> Marc
> 
> 
> 
> On Friday, 8 July 2016, Anthony G. Basile  wrote:
> 
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I emailed the list some time ago about giving away a bunch of bitcoin
>> forks to see if anyone was interested in taking them.  I didn't get any
>> feedback so as of tomorrow I'll be masking the following for removal in
>> 30 days.
>>
>> net-dns/namecoind
>> net-dns/namecoin-qt
>>
>> net-p2p/bitcoinxtd
>> net-p2p/bitcoinxt-qt
>>
>> net-p2p/litecoind
>> net-p2p/litecoin-qt
>>
>> net-p2p/ppcoind
>> net-p2p/ppcoin-qt
>>
>> net-p2p/primecoind
>> net-p2p/primecoin-qt
>>
>> --
>> Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D.
>> Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened]
>> E-Mail: bluen...@gentoo.org 
>> GnuPG FP  : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB  DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA
>> GnuPG ID  : F52D4BBA
>>
>>
> 


-- 
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D.
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened]
E-Mail: bluen...@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP  : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB  DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA
GnuPG ID  : F52D4BBA

Re: [gentoo-dev] masking and removing *coin packages

[Andrew Savchenko]

On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 08:10:07 -0500 james wrote:
> On 07/08/2016 05:17 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> > On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 20:30:36 -0400 Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> I emailed the list some time ago about giving away a bunch of bitcoin
> >> forks to see if anyone was interested in taking them.  I didn't get any
> >> feedback so as of tomorrow I'll be masking the following for removal in
> >> 30 days.
> >
> > Any reason for mask and removal? Are these packages broken?
> > Just drop them to maintainer-needed.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Andrew Savchenko
> >
> 
> Perhaps we should start posting these  orphaned-package announcements to 
> gentoo-user, so folks interested in learning about ebuilds can ponder 
> proxy-maintenance of a few packages as an opportunity?
> 
> 
> Surely there is a wider audience that will see some packages they like
> are going away because there are not enough maintainers, and thus 
> respond by 'stepping up' to maintain a few packages?

The idea sounds reasonable, but it doesn't answer why we have a
highly alarming tendency of purging working packages from the tree
just because they have no maintainer.

Best regards,
Andrew Savchenko


pgpUlNpgJIhdd.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] masking and removing *coin packages

[james]

On 07/08/2016 05:17 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:

On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 20:30:36 -0400 Anthony G. Basile wrote:

Hi everyone,

I emailed the list some time ago about giving away a bunch of bitcoin
forks to see if anyone was interested in taking them.  I didn't get any
feedback so as of tomorrow I'll be masking the following for removal in
30 days.


Any reason for mask and removal? Are these packages broken?
Just drop them to maintainer-needed.

Best regards,
Andrew Savchenko



Perhaps we should start posting these  orphaned-package announcements to 
gentoo-user, so folks interested in learning about ebuilds can ponder 
proxy-maintenance of a few packages as an opportunity?



Surely there is a wider audience that will see some packages they like
are going away because there are not enough maintainers, and thus 
respond by 'stepping up' to maintain a few packages?


hth,
James

Re: [gentoo-dev] masking and removing *coin packages

[Andrew Savchenko]

On Thu, 7 Jul 2016 20:30:36 -0400 Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I emailed the list some time ago about giving away a bunch of bitcoin
> forks to see if anyone was interested in taking them.  I didn't get any
> feedback so as of tomorrow I'll be masking the following for removal in
> 30 days.

Any reason for mask and removal? Are these packages broken?
Just drop them to maintainer-needed.

Best regards,
Andrew Savchenko


pgpjkGoWZ84vM.pgp
Description: PGP signature