Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft
On 01/31/2017 09:08 AM, David Seifert wrote: > On Tue, 2017-01-31 at 17:34 +0100, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: >> On 01/31/2017 03:50 PM, Georg Rudoy wrote: >>> I'll make a new release of leechcraft itself and bump the version >>> to >>> that new one, so they'll naturally be dropped to unstable, 0.6.70 >>> and >>> earlier (if any) indeed could be removed. Most of the bugs, as I >>> saw >>> them, are due to the current last released version being 2.5 years >>> old >>> and obviously bitrotten somewhat since then. >> >> I'd still recommend spending a bit of time to consider whether this >> doesn't fit better in an overlay, which would also make it easier to >> maintain without overburdening proxy maint given the number of >> packages >> involved. >> > > I really second this - we can ask infra to get you an overlay. Should > it turn out that you are truly maintaining stuff, we can then merge it > into the tree. > I'd like to third it. Overlays are a great way for people (users and devs alike) to try their hand maintaining their own Portage tree. It's great practice and it gives you a single place to reference for people who are using your ebuilds. If it gets formally into layman, I believe our bugzy will cover you, too, in case you don't want to use github. I'd ask infra just to be sure. Overlays for Gentoo are comparable to Debian's and Ubuntu's PPAs and are similarly simple to install/use/delete. -- Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft
On Tue, 2017-01-31 at 17:34 +0100, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > On 01/31/2017 03:50 PM, Georg Rudoy wrote: > > I'll make a new release of leechcraft itself and bump the version > > to > > that new one, so they'll naturally be dropped to unstable, 0.6.70 > > and > > earlier (if any) indeed could be removed. Most of the bugs, as I > > saw > > them, are due to the current last released version being 2.5 years > > old > > and obviously bitrotten somewhat since then. > > I'd still recommend spending a bit of time to consider whether this > doesn't fit better in an overlay, which would also make it easier to > maintain without overburdening proxy maint given the number of > packages > involved. > I really second this - we can ask infra to get you an overlay. Should it turn out that you are truly maintaining stuff, we can then merge it into the tree.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft
On 01/31/2017 03:50 PM, Georg Rudoy wrote: > I'll make a new release of leechcraft itself and bump the version to > that new one, so they'll naturally be dropped to unstable, 0.6.70 and > earlier (if any) indeed could be removed. Most of the bugs, as I saw > them, are due to the current last released version being 2.5 years old > and obviously bitrotten somewhat since then. I'd still recommend spending a bit of time to consider whether this doesn't fit better in an overlay, which would also make it easier to maintain without overburdening proxy maint given the number of packages involved. -- Kristian Fiskerstrand OpenPGP keyblock reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft
On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Georg Rudoy <0xd34df...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2017-01-31 3:22 GMT-05:00 David Seifert : >> Proxy-maint has always been there, so no real excuse for all those bugs >> rotting away. > > I didn't bother with finding another maint who'd proxy it for me, > yeah, that's my bad. > > >> Here's the deal: If you fix all those bugs within the 30 >> day time period, we'll keep it in the tree. Please also modernize the >> eclass a bit, and preferably drop all ebuilds to unstable. > > I'll make a new release of leechcraft itself and bump the version to > that new one, so they'll naturally be dropped to unstable, 0.6.70 and > earlier (if any) indeed could be removed. Most of the bugs, as I saw > them, are due to the current last released version being 2.5 years old > and obviously bitrotten somewhat since then. > > The ebuilds I have around use multibuild to build both qt4 and qt5 > versions according to use flags. Is that still relevant, or the world > has migrated to qt5 and the benefit of still supporting qt4 is not > worth the effort and clumsiness? Yeah, drop qt4 please. Thanks, Davide
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft
2017-01-31 3:22 GMT-05:00 David Seifert : > Proxy-maint has always been there, so no real excuse for all those bugs > rotting away. I didn't bother with finding another maint who'd proxy it for me, yeah, that's my bad. > Here's the deal: If you fix all those bugs within the 30 > day time period, we'll keep it in the tree. Please also modernize the > eclass a bit, and preferably drop all ebuilds to unstable. I'll make a new release of leechcraft itself and bump the version to that new one, so they'll naturally be dropped to unstable, 0.6.70 and earlier (if any) indeed could be removed. Most of the bugs, as I saw them, are due to the current last released version being 2.5 years old and obviously bitrotten somewhat since then. The ebuilds I have around use multibuild to build both qt4 and qt5 versions according to use flags. Is that still relevant, or the world has migrated to qt5 and the benefit of still supporting qt4 is not worth the effort and clumsiness? > Send all your PRs via Github, mentioning my handle @SoapGentoo. Thanks, will do. -- Georg Rudoy
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft
On Mon, 2017-01-30 at 17:43 -0500, Georg Rudoy wrote: > 2017-01-30 13:35 GMT-05:00 David Seifert : > > Please do not resurrect leechcraft unless you're willing to fix the > > bugs with GCC 5 (and GCC 6) and newer dependencies. Personally, I > > feel > > leechcraft should probably live in an overlay instead of the tree. > > I was previously proxy-maintaining it via Maxim Koltsov aka > maksbotan. > What's the best way for me to step up and maintain it more directly? > Would PRs on github work? > > Proxy-maint has always been there, so no real excuse for all those bugs rotting away. Here's the deal: If you fix all those bugs within the 30 day time period, we'll keep it in the tree. Please also modernize the eclass a bit, and preferably drop all ebuilds to unstable. Send all your PRs via Github, mentioning my handle @SoapGentoo. Given that this leechcraft ecosystem has a very small, dedicated community, I think maintaining it in a separate overlay, pulled in by layman or whatever would still be a better approach.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft
2017-01-30 13:35 GMT-05:00 David Seifert : > Please do not resurrect leechcraft unless you're willing to fix the > bugs with GCC 5 (and GCC 6) and newer dependencies. Personally, I feel > leechcraft should probably live in an overlay instead of the tree. I was previously proxy-maintaining it via Maxim Koltsov aka maksbotan. What's the best way for me to step up and maintain it more directly? Would PRs on github work? -- Georg Rudoy
[gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft
Please do not resurrect leechcraft unless you're willing to fix the bugs with GCC 5 (and GCC 6) and newer dependencies. Personally, I feel leechcraft should probably live in an overlay instead of the tree. # David Seifert (30 Jan 2017) # No maintainer activity since git migration, dated eclass # Multiple open bugs, with no activity: # 499176, 501170, 521072, 538156, 562300, 562476, 563714, # 586464, 587862, 588890, 602294, 603556, 607004 # Masked for removal in 30 days. app-leechcraft/laretz app-leechcraft/lc-advancednotifications app-leechcraft/lc-aggregator app-leechcraft/lc-anhero app-leechcraft/lc-auscrie app-leechcraft/lc-azoth app-leechcraft/lc-bittorrent app-leechcraft/lc-blasq app-leechcraft/lc-blogique app-leechcraft/lc-certmgr app-leechcraft/lc-core app-leechcraft/lc-cpuload app-leechcraft/lc-cstp app-leechcraft/lc-dbusmanager app-leechcraft/lc-deadlyrics app-leechcraft/lc-devmon app-leechcraft/lc-dolozhee app-leechcraft/lc-eleeminator app-leechcraft/lc-fenet app-leechcraft/lc-gacts app-leechcraft/lc-glance app-leechcraft/lc-gmailnotifier app-leechcraft/lc-historyholder app-leechcraft/lc-hotsensors app-leechcraft/lc-hotstreams app-leechcraft/lc-htthare app-leechcraft/lc-imgaste app-leechcraft/lc-intermutko app-leechcraft/lc-kbswitch app-leechcraft/lc-kinotify app-leechcraft/lc-knowhow app-leechcraft/lc-krigstask app-leechcraft/lc-lackman app-leechcraft/lc-lastfmscrobble app-leechcraft/lc-laughty app-leechcraft/lc-launchy app-leechcraft/lc-lemon app-leechcraft/lc-lhtr app-leechcraft/lc-liznoo app-leechcraft/lc-lmp app-leechcraft/lc-mellonetray app-leechcraft/lc-monocle app-leechcraft/lc-musiczombie app-leechcraft/lc-nacheku app-leechcraft/lc-netstoremanager app-leechcraft/lc-networkmonitor app-leechcraft/lc-newlife app-leechcraft/lc-ooronee app-leechcraft/lc-otlozhu app-leechcraft/lcpackgen app-leechcraft/lc-pintab app-leechcraft/lc-pogooglue app-leechcraft/lc-popishu app-leechcraft/lc-poshuku app-leechcraft/lc-qrosp app-leechcraft/lc-rosenthal app-leechcraft/lc-sb2 app-leechcraft/lc-scroblibre app-leechcraft/lc-secman app-leechcraft/lc-seekthru app-leechcraft/lc-summary app-leechcraft/lc-sysnotify app-leechcraft/lc-tabsessmanager app-leechcraft/lc-tabslist app-leechcraft/lc-touchstreams app-leechcraft/lc-tpi app-leechcraft/lc-vgrabber app-leechcraft/lc-vrooby app-leechcraft/lc-xproxy app-leechcraft/lc-xtazy app-leechcraft/leechcraft-meta app-leechcraft/liblaretz virtual/leechcraft-browser virtual/leechcraft-downloader-http virtual/leechcraft-notifier virtual/leechcraft-quark-sideprovider virtual/leechcraft-search-show virtual/leechcraft-storage-device-manager virtual/leechcraft-task-show virtual/leechcraft-trayarea virtual/leechcraft-wysiwyg-editor