Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFD] Adopt-a-package, proxy-maintenance, and other musings

[Ian Delaney]

On Fri, 22 Jan 2016 12:04:07 +0100
Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> wrote:

> On Thu, 21 Jan 2016 18:45:20 +0100
> Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
>
> > If I see a package that clearly doesn't build or otherwise simply
> > doesn't work, could not have worked for past 3 years, are you
> > forcing me to waste a time reporting a bug to no maintainer who
> > could fix it?
>
> sure, don't waste your time and just delete it so that nobody can
> track why it was removed or even attempt to fix it.
>
> > Because to me, the lack of any open bugs is a clear evidence that
> > the package is not only unmaintained, but also unused.
>
>
> lack of open bug means there is no known bug; anything else is pure
> supposition
>
>
>
> if you see a package that "could not have worked for past 3 years",
> you open a bug, cc treecleaners or lastrite it yourself, and it will
> be quickly gone
>

and on it goes. In the above we see a common theme. The emphasis on the
wasting of time over an absurd task because it is so obviously absurd.
Except, wait, it isn't so absurd because .......
This kind of leaping to a final conclusion and declaring an assessment
of it on a knee jerk type interpretation is all too common. Frankly I
find it difficult to fathom how this constant trail of such
premature evaluations has its source from gentoo developer
community; I.T. professional folk who by rights excel in objective
analysis of the data at hand and routinely arrive at technical
solutions to cover a minimal required set of conditions. Or is there
something wrong in my suppositions there regarding the precursors?

Either way; see 
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Proxy_Maintainers/Maintainer_Wanted

last edited between myself and kensington cs 24-01 this year. The
important content, obviously, are the Criteria for closing a report.


-- 
kind regards

Ian Delaney