Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship

Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-dev
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o>
Subject: Re: metadata.xml: <changepolicies>
Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2010 21:42:22 +0100
On 24-02-2010 23:41:26 +0000, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> Proposed types:
> ---------------
> - version-bump
> - trivial-version-bump
> - trivial-fixes
> - fixes
> - enhancements
> - qa-fixes
> - trivial-qa-fixes

Isn't the QA team by its definition allowed to fix QA issues?  If so, I
don't see a point in explicitly allowing qa-fixes of any kind, since
it's implicit for the QA team that is supposed to do this.  For QA its
probably good to get people in the loop anyway, so they learn, instead
of just find their packages fixed in one way or another.

In general it feels like if you really want to allow a very high degree
of modifications to your ebuilds as "maintainer", perhaps it is better
to introduce a special group of ebuilds that have in the best case
someone watching over them every now and then, but are not tied to
"someone".  Almost sounds like "maintainer-needed": looking for someone
who really cares about this package, perhaps even users welcome for
proxy maintenance.

Another thing may be just the "maintainer-timeout" thing, that simply
says that if the maintainer doesn't respond to requests for a
change/update, you are allowed to perform the change.  Normal sanity and
responsibility rules apply of course.  Some bugs just hang around for
even years with multiple devs commenting on them, and the maintainers
just not responding at all.  Seems like in such case a time-out rule
says more than a once written metadata element.

Maybe we just shouldn't try to own something, but rather be the first to
say something about it.  Maybe we should try to identify (groups of)
packages that are way more important than others (think of ... python?)
and mark them as needing special care, treatment and barriers before any
dev would feel like touching them.  Perhaps that would just mean rings
of developer ranks where the inner circle is QA or something?  The more
you are on the outside, the less you are allowed to touch by policy.  As
learning process, making the thin line of the Gentoo quizes too access
all or nothing more fine-grained and hopefully community controlled?

Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

metadata.xml: <changepolicies>
-- Robin H. Johnson
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: metadata.xml: <changepolicies>
Next by thread:
Re: metadata.xml: <changepolicies>
Previous by date:
Brief downtime @ 19:45 UTC TODAY of: crane, duck, hawk, pheasant, raven
Next by date:
Re: metadata.xml: <changepolicies>

Updated Jun 29, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.