1 |
On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 7:00 PM, Jeremy Olexa <darkside@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
>> On 03/27/2011 02:47 AM, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: |
4 |
>>> If you prohibit people from doing that, they'll just commit it |
5 |
>>> normally, and then remove themselves a week later. |
6 |
>> |
7 |
>> Why does anyone need to *add* a package that is maintainer-needed? This is |
8 |
>> one of the problems of the gentoo-x86 tree - too many maintainer-needed |
9 |
>> packages. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> I'm just pointing out that if you prohibit that by policy, this is |
12 |
> what people will do. The real problem is that maintainer-needed |
13 |
> packages are allowed to remain in the tree *indefinitely*. |
14 |
> |
15 |
>>> I propose that we should be more aggressive about package.masking (for |
16 |
>>> removal) all maintainer-needed packages from the tree by doing that |
17 |
>>> one month after they become maintainer-needed. If someone doesn't |
18 |
>>> volunteer to take care of it, it probably wasn't important anyway. |
19 |
>>> |
20 |
>> |
21 |
>> That is abit extreme for me (read: I don't have motivation to fight the |
22 |
>> flames), but I wouldn't complain if someone else did it to be honest. |
23 |
>> |
24 |
> |
25 |
> Just start removing old[1] maintainer-needed packages. If people |
26 |
> complain, tell them to start maintaining it. If they continue to |
27 |
> complain, ignore them. As tree-cleaner, you have the power to do this |
28 |
> and not take bullshit from people about it. |
29 |
|
30 |
The intent of the TreeCleaner project (years ago) was to essentially |
31 |
look for packages in bugzilla that had lots of bugs and no maintainer. |
32 |
For a while beandog essentially maintained a site that tracked this |
33 |
for us (Gentoo Package that need Lovin' was the awesome title.) |
34 |
|
35 |
From that list you either fixed the problems and commited them (e.g. |
36 |
you were a roving package maintainer) or you pmasked it and marked it |
37 |
for the deadpool. |
38 |
|
39 |
There is not much policy on treecleaning a package just because no one |
40 |
has touched it. Time since last touch was just one of a dozen |
41 |
indicators used to find packages that are broken (because a package |
42 |
not touched since 2006 is also not likely to compile.) |
43 |
|
44 |
-A |
45 |
|
46 |
> |
47 |
> |
48 |
> 1. Set old as one month, with a 2 month package.mask duration before |
49 |
> it's removed. |
50 |
> -- |
51 |
> ~Nirbheek Chauhan |
52 |
> |
53 |
> Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team |
54 |
> |
55 |
> |