Re: [gentoo-dev] missing metadata.xml

[Paul de Vrieze]

On Thursday 23 November 2006 11:20, Jakub Moc wrote:
> Bryan Østergaard napsal(a):
> > I think the most important thing about adding "empty" metadata.xml files
> > with maintainer-needed as maintainer is that it _changes_ the package to
> > be unmaintained by definition (that's what maintainer-needed means after
> > all) and that we can't be sure that's actually true unless we spend a
> > lot of time examining each package and asking potential maintainers
> > if it's unmaintained.
>
> Actually, I don't mind much. There's a developers or two who keep on
> adding packages without metadata.xml all the time (won't name anyone,
> I'm pretty sure they'll find themselves here :P). This will either force
> them to reclaim their packages via fixing the metadata.xml thing or will
> leave the ebuilds orphaned to m-needed - and then they shouldn't have
> been added in the first place.
>
> Above, I'm not talking about legacy stuff maintained in an ad-hoc manner
> for ages, but about fairly recent additions to the tree (~1 year or even
> less). However, even for legacy stuff, nothing is preventing the people
> from claiming their ebuilds the right way and adding themselves to
> metadata.xml - will make assigning bugs much easier for me. ;)

Repoman should check for missing metadata. The only packages that are allowed 
not to have metadata.xml would be those that have not been changed for over 3 
years (since the introduction of metadata.xml). Developers who violate the 
repoman checks by omitting a metadata.xml brought mayhem over themselves.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@g.o
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net