1 |
Hi, |
2 |
|
3 |
On 30/12/2019 00.30, William Hubbs wrote: |
4 |
> All, |
5 |
> |
6 |
> the Gentoo Council will meet on 2020-01-12 at 19:00 utc in the |
7 |
> #gentoo-council channel on freenode. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> Please reply to this message with any items you would like us to add |
10 |
> to the agenda. |
11 |
|
12 |
I'd like to request Council to define rules regarding maintainership |
13 |
boundaries and provide guidance regarding under what conditions one is |
14 |
allowed to make changes to packages that are by metadata.xml maintained |
15 |
by another party. |
16 |
|
17 |
The current situation is land of undefined rules and double standards |
18 |
under disguise of 'common sense'. Although it does work for most part, |
19 |
it's not uncommon to come across people that are overly territorial, |
20 |
treating Gentoo packages as their own personal property, who openly |
21 |
prohibit others from joining them as maintainers on packages, with the |
22 |
solo reasoning that they feel territorial and do not want others |
23 |
touching it. |
24 |
|
25 |
This leads to a situations, where some bugs reported on bugzilla are not |
26 |
fixed in timely fashion, even when there are other developers that are |
27 |
willing to fix those bugs and deal with whatever aftermath of doing |
28 |
those changes would bring. |
29 |
|
30 |
Because those rules are unsanctioned, we have land of middle |
31 |
inconvenience where one can never be sure if by declaring maintainer |
32 |
fimeout and fixing a bug would not bring ComRel on him, for touching the |
33 |
package one does not maintain. By defining rules and guidelines, it |
34 |
would greatly benefit Gentoo as a whole as well as reduce the |
35 |
frustration that come from dealing with people who are gate keeping |
36 |
while being unable to provide a valid reason why they do not want anyone |
37 |
toucing their property. |
38 |
|
39 |
-- Piotr. |