Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Alec Warner <antarus@g.o>
To: Gentoo Dev <gentoo-dev@l.g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Idea for a new project: gentoo-libs
Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2018 17:01:24
Message-Id: CAAr7Pr_s=gpmiSVkJmSS8CLO_m3TtYaWw3r9=u5DxFc6Eny21g@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Idea for a new project: gentoo-libs by Richard Yao
1 On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Richard Yao <ryao@g.o> wrote:
2
3 >
4 >
5 > On Jun 23, 2018, at 6:59 AM, Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> wrote:
6 >
7 >
8 >
9 > On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 3:30 AM, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@×××××××××.com>
10 > wrote:
11 >
12 >> On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 09:22:00AM +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
13 >> > W dniu pią, 22.06.2018 o godzinie 21∶50 -0500, użytkownik Marty E.
14 >> > Plummer napisał:
15 >> > > So, as you may be aware I've been doing some work on moving bzip2 to
16 >> an
17 >> > > autotools based build. Recently I've ran into app-crypt/mhash, which
18 >> is
19 >> > > in a semi-abandoned state (talking with the maintainer on twitter
20 >> atm),
21 >> > > and I was thinking it may be a good idea to set up a project for
22 >> keeping
23 >> > > these semi-abandoned and really-abandoned libraries and projects up to
24 >> > > date and such.
25 >> > >
26 >> > > Basically, an upstream for packages who's upstream is either
27 >> > > uncontactable or is otherwise not accepting bug fixes and patches. So
28 >> > > far I can only think of app-crypt/mhash and app-arch/bzip2 but I'm
29 >> sure
30 >> > > there are others in this state.
31 >> > >
32 >> >
33 >> > So in order to fix problem of semi-abandoned packages, you're creating
34 >> > an indirect herd-like entity that will soon be semi-abandoned itself
35 >> > because people will be dumping random packages into it and afterwards
36 >> > nobody will claim responsibility for them.
37 >> >
38 >> > --
39 >> > Best regards,
40 >> > Michał Górny
41 >>
42 >> No, I mean for packages which are important enough in gentoo to warrant
43 >> such treatment. For instance, every email I've tried for bzip2's
44 >> upstream bounced or recieved no reply. That, I assume, is important
45 >> enough to actually maintain and improve. Any other library which may be
46 >> as important which are as inactive would be added.
47 >>
48 >>
49 > I suspect this might be better done in the Linux foundation itself as they
50 > have staffing for core components that everyone is using.
51 >
52 > This would put decision making power into the hands of bureaucrats. I
53 > would rather it remain in a community of volunteers.
54 >
55
56 Meh, it doesn't hurt to ask there about interest (they certainly fund
57 development of other components.) Its not like they have to accept, or that
58 declining somehow inhibits this development.
59
60 Part of my frustration is that seemingly "anything open source related can
61 be held in Gentoo" and I'm somewhat against that as I feel it dilutes the
62 Gentoo mission. We are here to make a distribution, not maintain random
63 libraries. If you want to do that feel free; but I don't see a need for
64 that work to be associated with Gentoo.
65
66
67 >
68 > I consider upstream development efforts by Gentoo developers to be
69 > beneficial to Gentoo. Nothing makes fixing an issue in Gentoo at upstream a
70 > priority quite like it affecting a key upstream developer in his day to day
71 > life.
72 >
73
74 >
75 > Also, the Linux Foundation is not embarking on such a project and we
76 > clearly have someone willing to try, so I say that we should go for it.
77 > Having people that wish to take a more active role in upstream development
78 > would not make us any worse off. It is their time to volunteer, so it is
79 > not like they will volunteer it for something else if we discourage them.
80 >

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Idea for a new project: gentoo-libs "M. J. Everitt" <m.j.everitt@×××.org>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Idea for a new project: gentoo-libs Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] Idea for a new project: gentoo-libs Richard Yao <ryao@g.o>