| 1 |
Mark Loeser wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Yea, the current situation has quickly turned into a mess. I definately |
| 4 |
> think that QA should definately be watching |
| 5 |
> maintainer-wanted/maintainer-needed and helping clean up new ebuilds, or |
| 6 |
> removing old unmaintained packages that no one cares about anymore. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
A bugzilla feature to automatically close bugs these bugs after a set |
| 9 |
period of inactivity would certainly help. Dunno if it's possible, |
| 10 |
though. :) |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Otherwise, some review used to be done, but there's been a negative |
| 13 |
opinion about closing bugs w/ sucky broken ebuilds as WONTFIX/CANTFIX |
| 14 |
expressed by some of the devs; as it stands now - it's basically |
| 15 |
impossible to reasonably track the bugs unless it can be sorted by |
| 16 |
status and users reopen the bugs when they think they've fixed the |
| 17 |
outstanding issues... |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Finally - I'd suggest marking all ebuild *requests* as CANTFIX or |
| 20 |
NEEDINFO or whatever you think would be best resolution, there's tons of |
| 21 |
bugs w/ ebuilds submitted that can't find a maintainer. If you want |
| 22 |
something in portage, do you homework at least and attempt an ebuild. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Just my $0.02... |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Best regards, |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Jakub Moc |
| 31 |
mailto:jakub@g.o |
| 32 |
GPG signature: |
| 33 |
http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E |
| 34 |
Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
... still no signature ;) |
Archives