1 |
On 2018.06.23 09:55, Marty E. Plummer wrote: |
2 |
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 10:15:06AM +0200, Paweł Hajdan, Jr. wrote: |
3 |
> > On 23/06/2018 09:43, Mikle Kolyada wrote: |
4 |
> > > But how would it serve gentoo itself? Lots of packages in the |
5 |
> distro |
6 |
> > > have dead upstream but still work. |
7 |
> > > Why would you want to make gentoo an upstream area rather than |
8 |
> moving a |
9 |
> > > dead project itself, say, |
10 |
> > > to github and do the job there? |
11 |
> > |
12 |
> > +1 |
13 |
> > |
14 |
> > I like the idea of taking responsibility for the abandoned packages |
15 |
> that |
16 |
> > are still useful. |
17 |
> > |
18 |
> > It's probably not Gentoo-specific, so a distro-neutral way of |
19 |
> handling |
20 |
> > that seems most appropriate. |
21 |
> > |
22 |
> > It may even be worth it to coordinate with other distros (and maybe |
23 |
> > downstreams) so that the new version becomes a standard. |
24 |
> > |
25 |
> > Finally, having more than one person on this (to help continuity), |
26 |
> and a |
27 |
> > common platform like GitHub also seem very helpful. |
28 |
> > |
29 |
> > Paweł |
30 |
> > |
31 |
> Agreed in general; the problem is getting it started at all; difficult |
32 |
> to get other distros to join if there is nothing to join. |
33 |
> |
34 |
> |
35 |
> |
36 |
|
37 |
A couple of generalisations. |
38 |
|
39 |
The first solution to unmaintained packages should be to move to an |
40 |
alternative, if that's possible. Gentoo does not have the resource |
41 |
to be upstream for very much for the entire Linux community, a point |
42 |
already made by others. |
43 |
|
44 |
In volunteer groups things get done by those who want to do them. |
45 |
Others join later. I think the quote I'm looking for is "Build it and they |
46 |
will come". |
47 |
|
48 |
-- |
49 |
Regards, |
50 |
|
51 |
Roy Bamford |
52 |
(Neddyseagoon) a member of |
53 |
elections |
54 |
gentoo-ops |
55 |
forum-mods |