Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <jmbsvicetto@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving unmaintained packages to Sunrise
Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2010 14:27:03
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Moving unmaintained packages to Sunrise by "Michał Górny"
2 Hash: SHA1
4 On 13-06-2010 08:41, Michał Górny wrote:
5 > Hello,
6 >
7 > There are some packages which were 'readded' to the Sunrise overlay
8 > after lying unmaintained in the tree for a long time and finally being
9 > removed. One example could be net-im/ekg2 for removal of which I've been
10 > personally waiting.
11 >
12 > Although such a workflow 'works' indeed, for most of the users packages
13 > are just removed. Even if they use Sunrise, the delay of few days
14 > required in order to get the new ebuild rewritten and reviewed causes
15 > them to remove and forget about the package. And in fact, gx86 states
16 > it was 'removed'.
17 >
18 > Currently, the Sunrise policy states that there could be added only
19 > packages which are maintainer-wanted and thus not in gx86. For
20 > maintainer-needed, there is a proxy-commit mechanism but it's a little
21 > awkward, especially if the new ebuild is supposed to be written from
22 > scratch (like ekg2 one was).
23 >
24 > Wouldn't it be better to officially support moving unmaintained
25 > packages directly into Sunrise? In this case by 'unmaintained' I mean
26 > those which have open bugs assigned to 'maintainer-needed' for a long
27 > time, and are potentially a candidates for the treecleaning (not
28 > necessarily being in the removal queue yet).
30 I think you might not have been around at that time, but when the
31 sunrise overlay was created, there was a proposal to create a sunset
32 overlay, like the java team used and now kde uses as well.
33 The purpose of this overlay would be to keep the packages that are
34 removed from the tree because they have no maintainers.
35 As was discussed back then, the people wishing to work on sunrise are
36 likely not interested in having all the removed packages dumped in their
37 shoulders. Besides, sunrise is about packages that have an interested
38 user submitting and hopefully maintaining ebuilds for new packages,
39 while sunset is likely to become a dumping ground for stuff that we
40 can't find anyone to take care of.
41 If we want to find a way to not drop the maintainer-needed packages, I'd
42 prefer we move them to sunset and not to sunrise. As this overlay is
43 likely to become large, probably "huge", and as it will host security
44 vulnerable packages, we should evaluate whether we really want to host
45 it and, if so, what measures to take to protect "distracted users". I
46 think package masking all the packages put there with links to relevant
47 bugs might be a first step.
49 > The particular Sunrise user wanting to maintain the package suggests
50 > moving it to Sunrise (to whom?). If developers agree on that, he is
51 > allowed to prepare the Sunrise ebuild and even commit it to the
52 > 'sunrise' (non-public) tree.
53 >
54 > When Sunrise dev does the final review, after which the package would
55 > be moved to 'reviewed' (public) tree, he/she also masks the original
56 > package in gx86 stating that the package is now maintained in Sunrise.
57 > After 30 (or more) days, the masked gx86 packages are removed as usual.
58 >
59 > The advantage of such a workflow is quite obvious -- instead of seeing
60 > 'removed' packages which they need to either copy to their own overlay
61 > or abandon, users are advised to add 'sunrise' to their repository list
62 > and use the user-maintained ebuild. And then the move is almost
63 > transparent to current Sunrise users.
65 The problem with the above is exposing users to potentially "dangerous"
66 applications - from a security perspective.
68 - --
69 Regards,
71 Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org
72 Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections
74 Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux)
75 Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -
78 sqZIfIULeVY4Xh5EaGJ/kS1cLyFuy+QXU2y/NLFWT7+DD9vPZiUGx/z90ph6irVC
79 YURd9scd4SdDKJKv2vp56A0USPXfRqRxok6l1m2HvZaqMoV+WN9Y+WQ/wxcu69Ce
80 2hDUikABMwAazjA5GotfC7Wa5Aadk6+6fYVSMiCZAtpD35rq+9yLJ8wJFr0YQq50
81 1Cj/B2vyA90uXRG/wfWhetU+sOLsOoF0yGoINHMzRon6J8SgQr+5mLsQYL1JhcsK
82 yNem0omoBB0qio4kihxT5L11n8rK2nesLr+ay93udfPc/0hHy6J6rK+ZCW5alG1r
83 fARHgKcdU+HPwXKp2xhAJyo/ooHZFN32DhEfEE6RF5M2KS4wq2kNhLnh0mnMRjtV
84 GhH3TWC8DFuMwZDFwYZs99G1biCmc4jaw7xyAx9Q3c60vB0UGeVPlCb73CwuE3we
85 5YHuEyG2TY7Xju7wGm/KLte70FUK+MynJL+yaF4fkxkVz7YzOSTMcEv9YgvWJ3kF
86 aa1U1B6TQxEqqR2w734SNB3dE/BMyrWXvJ8WMfw63NpDRfkEVmC9ogarLvOtEjQ0
87 GQ9Id7hx85B+1+8LsKwrHJu09cEDsB7k0+l2AFGJ8llWX8ptBeYhZfLzhPzYllhB
88 DEUzrXPW7/AyrLwpyU8j
89 =7Q9z
90 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: Moving unmaintained packages to Sunrise Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving unmaintained packages to Sunrise "Petteri Räty" <betelgeuse@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Moving unmaintained packages to Sunrise Sebastian Pipping <sping@g.o>