Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Alec Warner <antarus@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] treecleaner removals
Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2006 12:42:44
Message-Id: 451BC2BE.4030105@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] treecleaner removals by Drake Wyrm
1 Drake Wyrm wrote:
2 > Christian Heim <phreak@g.o> wrote:
3 >
4 >> # Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> (27 Aug 2006)
5 >> # Masking media-radio/xlog for treecleaners and bug(s) # 88580
6 >> # Sept 27th for removal
7 >> media-radio/xlog
8 >>
9 >> Punted.
10 >
11 > So, why was this one punted, anyway? The bug was fixed in the new
12 > version, and an updated ebuild was submitted?
13 >
14
15 Fixing an open bug is up to the Treecleaning dev in question. I've been
16 talking to some people on how exactly to handle this. I don't want to
17 bump random packages and not add myself as maintainer; usually this
18 amounts to the same package having a bug assigned to maintainer-needed
19 or treecleaners in a couple of months (either for another bump; or some
20 other reason). However if I were to take ownership of every maintainer
21 needed package that has an ebuild I'd soon be the proud owner of about
22 100 packages that I don't care about.
23
24 The masking and the e-mails and the bug filings are done for a reason; a
25 loud and clear "this bug needs a maintainer or it's getting axed." Some
26 stuff gets fixed (aka pornview) most of it gets punted instead.
27
28 - Alec Warner
29 --
30 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] treecleaner removals Mark Stier <markstier@×××××.com>
Re: [gentoo-dev] treecleaner removals Andrew Gaffney <agaffney@g.o>