| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Tuesday 06 January 2004 09:17, Robert Cole wrote: |
| 5 |
> But I want to know if the brick wall that others have hit is still |
| 6 |
> there or not. There's been a bit o conflict in teh past where gentoo |
| 7 |
> will call for maintainers for certain projects yet previously slapped |
| 8 |
> down up and coming devs that want to maintain a different project. Why |
| 9 |
> would they volunteer for the requested project after being hammered |
| 10 |
> previously even if they have the skill to do the requested one? Would |
| 11 |
> you? Who would? From my understanding the devs are overwhelmed right |
| 12 |
> now with maintaining the current tree and need more people to take on |
| 13 |
> maintaining packages. The egos need to go by by and just do a quick |
| 14 |
> check to see if the ebuild and the dev have followed policy and mark |
| 15 |
> the thing ~x86 or whatever arch it is and toss it out. If it floats |
| 16 |
> then great they've proven themselves. If it sinks then a bit more |
| 17 |
> education is in order, pull the package and politely ask the new dev |
| 18 |
> to find and fix the problem and describe clearly what the problem was |
| 19 |
> and what they did to fix it and if it apears they understand the |
| 20 |
> problem and had a good solution toss it back in the tree to go again. |
| 21 |
> It would likely float the second time. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
There is unfortunately a limit on the amount of devs that we can handle. |
| 24 |
We are still busy putting more structure in the gentoo organization, but |
| 25 |
we would certainly have a problem if the amount of developers increased |
| 26 |
drastically. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> I'm not suggesting giving someone new with no established background |
| 29 |
> any sort of access. What I'm suggesting is basically what Allen spoke |
| 30 |
> of in just encouraging more contributions but accepting ebuilds faster |
| 31 |
> and the person with the proper access toss it in the tree. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Like said before, the issue is not the initial ebuild. It is the |
| 34 |
maintenance, including fixing bug reports and new versions. At the |
| 35 |
moment there are allready too many packages in the tree that are not |
| 36 |
actually maintained. This is partly due to the fact that those packages |
| 37 |
are not easy to identify, and partly because it are just low-profile |
| 38 |
packages. But that does not mean that we want more of those packages. |
| 39 |
However when an ebuild gets committed without someone maintaining it |
| 40 |
that is exactly what happens. If there are too many of those orphan |
| 41 |
ebuilds it will reflect on the distribution (most orphan ebuilds have |
| 42 |
issues because of not being maintained) |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
Paul |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
- -- |
| 47 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 48 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 49 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 50 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
| 51 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 52 |
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
iD8DBQE/+rDEbKx5DBjWFdsRAoeNAJ4x9wMNJoi7CCMRqBCPJPrGOHrDUwCdGLGp |
| 55 |
oA6tDMX7fglK22bUZ2zsy54= |
| 56 |
=sYex |
| 57 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
-- |
| 61 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives