Re: [gentoo-dev] irregular project metadata check

[Joshua Saddler]

On Tue, 8 Dec 2009 10:20:36 +0100
Thilo Bangert <bangert@g.o> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
> similarly to the metadata.xml check, the following is a list of small
> problems related to the project metadata as found in the gentoo CVS
> repository.
            
> Documentation: Only 1 developers signed up for project!

Only one GDP member, eh? Your script is rather unreliable. Take, for example, our GDP page:

http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gdp/index.xml

It lists all our developers, as does:

http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/doc/en/metadoc.xml?view=markup

Yet your script only seems to be looking at devrel's roll-call/userinfo.xml file, which is autogenerated from the LDAP attributes each developer has. The problem with checking LDAP for roles is that there doesn't seem to be a standard way to label projects. For docs, you'll find the following roles:

French Documentation Lead
Documentation
Documentation, Developer Relations, Infrastructure
---> this one doesn't seem to be counted as Documentation, since it lists other roles.
Documentation, Czech Translation
Translator Follow-Up
. . . etc.

There are LOTS more different references to working with documentation or translation, some of them not even for the GDP. Normally "Documentation" refers to the GDP, but I see some devs in there who are not on the GDP team who list Documentation as a primary role. No standardization there whatsoever.

Another problem with checking LDAP attributes is that they tend to be very out-of-date, even more so than project pages. People get their LDAP stuff set ONCE, when they first join, then tend to forget about them for the rest of their stay in Gentoo. Examples: all the Xfce (or XFCE) guys who are no longer there, or anyone who's added six different teams and package herds since their original responsibilities.

I wish there was a standard way of labelling existing duties, and I wish there was an easier way to update the LDAP attributes. I think no one cares enough to login to dev.g.o to change their stuff, as the process is tedious.

You may want to point your script at all our (sub)project index pages and check for the <dev role> tag to see who does what, though that may generate some false hits because not all of 'em will actually be Gentoo developers, as in the case of arch testers.