| 1 |
On 8/18/20 8:05 AM, Joonas Niilola wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hey, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> some of you may already have seen the new packages.gentoo.org page, |
| 5 |
> https://packages.gentoo.org/ |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> and the new maintainer pages in it, |
| 8 |
> https://packages.gentoo.org/maintainers |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> If you open a maintainer page, |
| 11 |
> https://packages.gentoo.org/maintainer/juippis@g.o |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> you can see a tab called "pull requests" there, |
| 14 |
> https://packages.gentoo.org/maintainer/juippis@g.o/pull-requests |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> with description saying: |
| 17 |
> "If you also like to help the Gentoo project, you can consider sending a |
| 18 |
> Pull Request via GitHub. |
| 19 |
> Before doing so, you might want to take a look at the wiki page." |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> I'm suggesting of adding a new metadata flag to our Wiki's |
| 22 |
> User:/Project: page which then prints a message to this page saying |
| 23 |
> whether the maintainer (be it project or user), "accepts" or "deals |
| 24 |
> with" Github contributions. The wording can be a bit better, but it'd be |
| 25 |
> there to **notify** our **contributors** whether their time and effort |
| 26 |
> will most likely be wasted making a pull request for this particular |
| 27 |
> maintainer. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> This note would then be displayed in every package the maintainer is |
| 30 |
> assigned to, |
| 31 |
> https://packages.gentoo.org/packages/media-libs/rlottie/pull-requests |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> I'd imagine a simple switch in Wiki could do it. No need to add anything |
| 34 |
> to ::gentoo repo. The switch can be visible in User:/Project: page, but |
| 35 |
> it doesn't have to. Unspecified metadata flag would print something like |
| 36 |
> "This maintainer hasn't specified whether they handle Github pull |
| 37 |
> requests. If you wish to help using Github, please also open a bug prior |
| 38 |
> to that and link your pull request commit to that bug (add link to |
| 39 |
> glep-66 here)". Or just default it to "No." |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> Note that the bug text could always be displayed nevertheless, since |
| 42 |
> that is still the main channel to communicate with maintainers. |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
> It's undeniable we get a lot of pull requests and unfortunate that many |
| 45 |
> are left without any attention to rot. |
| 46 |
> https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pulls |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> I think this would serve both parties - devs and contributors, with |
| 49 |
> little to no cost. |
| 50 |
> |
| 51 |
> -- juippis |
| 52 |
> |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
Personally, I'd rather see a generic package maintenance tags. |
| 57 |
"Accepts Github PRs" |
| 58 |
"Accepts any contribution freely" |
| 59 |
"Accepts project member contributions" |
| 60 |
"Accepts contributions after contact/N Week timeout" |
| 61 |
"Accepts no contributions" |
| 62 |
or similar |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
Most of my packages fall within projects that keep synchronized with |
| 65 |
external overlays/repositories and it drives me absolutely bonkers when |
| 66 |
someone edits my packages (contrary to Gentoo official policy) without |
| 67 |
speaking to me first so that I can ensure the changes are replicated. |
| 68 |
So I'd welcome something that pushes further standardization of that |
| 69 |
preexisting policy. Allow devs to specify when they are OK with |
| 70 |
relaxing the existing policy, but keep it in force for those who want |
| 71 |
and/or need it. |
| 72 |
|
| 73 |
-- |
| 74 |
Thanks, |
| 75 |
|
| 76 |
Adam Feldman |
| 77 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 78 |
NP-Hardass@g.o |
| 79 |
0x671C52F118F89C67 |
Archives