1 |
On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 3:30 AM, Marty E. Plummer <hanetzer@×××××××××.com> |
2 |
wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 09:22:00AM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: |
5 |
> > W dniu pią, 22.06.2018 o godzinie 21∶50 -0500, użytkownik Marty E. |
6 |
> > Plummer napisał: |
7 |
> > > So, as you may be aware I've been doing some work on moving bzip2 to an |
8 |
> > > autotools based build. Recently I've ran into app-crypt/mhash, which is |
9 |
> > > in a semi-abandoned state (talking with the maintainer on twitter atm), |
10 |
> > > and I was thinking it may be a good idea to set up a project for |
11 |
> keeping |
12 |
> > > these semi-abandoned and really-abandoned libraries and projects up to |
13 |
> > > date and such. |
14 |
> > > |
15 |
> > > Basically, an upstream for packages who's upstream is either |
16 |
> > > uncontactable or is otherwise not accepting bug fixes and patches. So |
17 |
> > > far I can only think of app-crypt/mhash and app-arch/bzip2 but I'm sure |
18 |
> > > there are others in this state. |
19 |
> > > |
20 |
> > |
21 |
> > So in order to fix problem of semi-abandoned packages, you're creating |
22 |
> > an indirect herd-like entity that will soon be semi-abandoned itself |
23 |
> > because people will be dumping random packages into it and afterwards |
24 |
> > nobody will claim responsibility for them. |
25 |
> > |
26 |
> > -- |
27 |
> > Best regards, |
28 |
> > Michał Górny |
29 |
> |
30 |
> No, I mean for packages which are important enough in gentoo to warrant |
31 |
> such treatment. For instance, every email I've tried for bzip2's |
32 |
> upstream bounced or recieved no reply. That, I assume, is important |
33 |
> enough to actually maintain and improve. Any other library which may be |
34 |
> as important which are as inactive would be added. |
35 |
> |
36 |
> |
37 |
I suspect this might be better done in the Linux foundation itself as they |
38 |
have staffing for core components that everyone is using. |
39 |
|
40 |
-A |