| 1 |
Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> said: |
| 2 |
> So we created this awesome alias to put ebuilds that need a maintainer. |
| 3 |
> Good idea at the time, decent idea still. The problem? We have nearly |
| 4 |
> 2000 open bugs assigned to maintainer-wanted[1]. I would like to |
| 5 |
> discuss policy on these. Do we keep them, do we get a group of people |
| 6 |
> to slowly review and discard them? Do we mind having a ton of things |
| 7 |
> open like this (a quasi-ebuild db of sorts). Is bugs the right place |
| 8 |
> for this sort of thing, or can we improve somewhere/how? |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Yea, the current situation has quickly turned into a mess. I definately |
| 11 |
think that QA should definately be watching |
| 12 |
maintainer-wanted/maintainer-needed and helping clean up new ebuilds, or |
| 13 |
removing old unmaintained packages that no one cares about anymore. The |
| 14 |
problem with maintainer-wanted is the pure number of possible packages |
| 15 |
we *could* have in the tree, but no one wants to add. After discussing |
| 16 |
this briefly with antarus, I agree that it might be cool to write up our |
| 17 |
own homebrewed app to handle this. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Basically, it would be something that allowed you to "browse" the current |
| 20 |
tree of submitted ebuilds. This way users that submit something can |
| 21 |
categorize it for devs to easily look for ebuilds they may be interested |
| 22 |
in, and we can make it so we could easily grab the ebuilds from this hacked |
| 23 |
up idea of a tree. It would make it a lot easier to do automated checks |
| 24 |
against submitted ebuilds for QA issues, and we would offload all of those |
| 25 |
submissions from bugs.g.o to this app. I guess you could think of it as |
| 26 |
the overlays.g.o idea, but I tend to think overlays are experimental |
| 27 |
things that aren't necessarily going to be added to the tree. This |
| 28 |
would be for ebuilds/packages that are ready to be added to the tree, |
| 29 |
but just lack someone that wants to maintain them. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Comments on this idea are appreciated. I wouldn't mind helping write it |
| 32 |
and maintain it, but having interest and support in doing something like |
| 33 |
this is definately going to be needed :) |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86) |
| 37 |
email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org |
| 38 |
mark AT halcy0n DOT com |
| 39 |
web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/ |
| 40 |
http://www.halcy0n.com |
Archives