Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: maintainer-wanted bugcount
Markus Ullmann wrote: K, to sum it up then, everything stays like it is atm. I think that makes sense. Yes, it's unrealistic for us to be able to handle all of them, but I think that's a perfectly reasonable situation. It's common for open source projects to have an excess of feature requests; it's a natural imbalance given that there are significantly more users than developers in almost all cases. Daniel -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: maintainer-wanted bugcount
K, to sum it up then, everything stays like it is atm. Thanks for your comments :) Greetz -Jokey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: maintainer-wanted bugcount
Monday, 26. November 2007, Markus Ullmann Ви написали: > Robin H. Johnson schrieb: > > On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 10:46:12AM +0100, Markus Ullmann wrote: > > d) In addition to c), keep them open, flagged with sunrise in the status > >board, so that when a developer does want some package not in the > >tree, they can search first. > > That's done already So what's the problem? The only onse where there is a valid issue, I think, are the ones where upstream has gone missing or no longer supports the package. (Even "better alternatives" thing is questionable IMHO. There are always people who have a different idea of better :)). These can be dealt with by having a dedicated force, perhaps comprised of people most annoyed by these bugs ;), who would simply scan the bugzilla for maintainer-wanted bugs, check the upstream and, if it is dead, close the bug with INVALID and a note of a dead upstream.. > > > e) Encourage existing developers to review and commit this stuff more > >often. > > That would be the best option Except the issue with all these packages is not committing but maintaining them. Sure, we could go on a committing spree and never touch any of these packages again. We even had such a situation at one point (rather long time ago) and it is specifically discouraged now. The "really best" option would be recruiting new devs so that we have enogh people to maintain everything and add more, as was already suggested. This in fact does happen, it is just that the rate of new joins cannot be infinite plus we seem to experience our growing pains periodically.. George -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: maintainer-wanted bugcount
Robin H. Johnson schrieb: > On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 10:46:12AM +0100, Markus Ullmann wrote: > d) In addition to c), keep them open, flagged with sunrise in the status >board, so that when a developer does want some package not in the >tree, they can search first. That's done already > e) Encourage existing developers to review and commit this stuff more >often. That would be the best option > I really would not want to see them closed unless there is a good reason > for them to not be committed to the tree. See the reason's I've given here: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/179 Greetz -Jokey signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: maintainer-wanted bugcount
Robin H. Johnson wrote: > d) In addition to c), keep them open, flagged with sunrise in the status >board, so that when a developer does want some package not in the >tree, they can search first. > e) Encourage existing developers to review and commit this stuff more >often. > > I really would not want to see them closed unless there is a good reason > for them to not be committed to the tree. ++ -- looks like christmas at fifty-five degrees this latitude weakens my knees EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 (0xF9A40662) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
