Gentoo Archives: gentoo-proxy-maint

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-proxy-maint <gentoo-proxy-maint@l.g.o>
Cc: proxy-maint <proxy-maint@g.o>
Subject: [gentoo-proxy-maint] Proxy-maint situation and future
Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2019 14:43:25
Message-Id: 5b67413efd86e022cc533dba0b71d7146a32bc66.camel@gentoo.org
1 Hile, everyone. Hile, team.
2
3 Let me start with some numbers.
4
5 Currently proxy-maint@g.o is present in 868 packages. Of those,
6 652 (75%) are entirely proxy-maintained (the remaining one having
7 additional Gentoo developers or projects).
8
9 The proxy-maint project currently lists 14 developers. Even if we did
10 consider all of them active (which would be an overstatement) that would
11 mean 62/46 packages per one proxy. It's a fairly high number, but
12 realistically we can expect even twice as much.
13
14 Right now, there's 47 pull requests adding new packages open on GitHub
15 (some of them may add more than one package). There's also 29 requests
16 regarding maintainer-needed packages, and at least some of them involve
17 taking the package over (and if they don't, we really ought to encourage
18 that).
19
20 All this considered, I'm starting to wonder what would be the best way
21 forward. So far we're dealing with a strong tendency towards adding new
22 packages. Furthermore, some of the recently added packages tend to
23 involve frequent version bumps. While we certainly have many good
24 maintainers who are doing great job (and thankya big-big to them!),
25 I believe we're being overburdened.
26
27 My main concern is reaching a situation where we can't manage to timely
28 merge updates to packages already in proxy-maint, and I think we're
29 already close to that (if not suffering it already). Therefore,
30 I believe we should prioritize on taking care of packages already
31 in proxy-maint over taking new packages in.
32
33 However, I'm not sure if this is sufficient. It might be necessary to
34 introduce some restrictions on accepting new packages. Possibly avoid
35 packages that look like very high maintenance burden.
36
37 What are your thoughts on this? Do you have any specific ideas on how
38 we could improve the situation?
39
40 --
41 Best regards,
42 Michał Górny

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-proxy-maint] Proxy-maint situation and future Ralph Seichter <abbot@×××××××××××.net>
Re: [gentoo-proxy-maint] Proxy-maint situation and future "Corentin “Nado” Pazdera" <nado@××××××××××.be>