1 |
In my humble opinion, sunrise is a needless layer of bureaucracy to getting |
2 |
new packages into the tree. Personlly, I think it's not a bad idea for new |
3 |
packages to be submitted as enhancements directly on bugzilla, possibly |
4 |
CCing any relevant projects who could provide a review. |
5 |
|
6 |
|
7 |
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 2:23 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: |
8 |
|
9 |
> Hello, everyone. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> It has recently came to my attention that things are quite bad with |
12 |
> the Sunrise project [1] lately. Most of the developers have left |
13 |
> the project, and it seems that the contributors have done the same. |
14 |
> The public reviewed repository has major QA issues and hasn't been |
15 |
> updated since mid-2015. The last non-developer commit to the private |
16 |
> repo also seems to come from mid-2015, followed only by a number of |
17 |
> removals and fixes done by Gentoo developers. |
18 |
> |
19 |
> Therefore, I'd like to ask the following question: is it time to |
20 |
> announce the project dead, or do some developers want to revive it? |
21 |
> If the former, could someone try to contact last active contributors |
22 |
> and ask them if they'd like to move their ebuilds to ::gentoo |
23 |
> via proxy-maint? |
24 |
> |
25 |
> I should point out that Sunrise has lost a lot of popularity to |
26 |
> proxy-maint, then also to GitHub pull requests (and the two combined). |
27 |
> The developers involved with those provide quite a good review |
28 |
> workflow, with the extra advantage of getting packages straight |
29 |
> into ::gentoo. I don't know how many users would be interested |
30 |
> in keeping them in ::sunrise if they could have them straight |
31 |
> in ::gentoo with similar (if not less...) effort. |
32 |
> |
33 |
> Your thoughts? |
34 |
> |
35 |
> [1]:https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Sunrise |
36 |
> |
37 |
> -- |
38 |
> Best regards, |
39 |
> Michał Górny |
40 |
> <http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/> |
41 |
> |