On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 10:13:24AM +0200, Marek Hulán wrote:
On úterý 18. července 2017 13:15:22 CEST Greg Sutcliffe wrote:
Hi all,
I've been thinking for a while about plugins, and how to continue them
when original authors move on. It's only natural that developers will
come and go, so we need to think about how to deal with this. We've got
a few examples of this now, and have had others in the past.
1) I'm playing with Salt in my spare time at the moment, with a view to
(maybe) taking on the foreman_salt plugin, since Stephen is no longer
working on it. However, it's only chance that I know this fact -
there's no easy way for an author to mark a plugin as "orphaned".
2) Some plugins are awaiting changes but the author hasn't responded
(yet!). Foreman_bootdisk has some open PRs at the moment that fall into
this category (PRs 42, 43 for example), and default_hostgroup has pen
issues (oops!). Presumably we need a way to ping authors and find out
if they're just AFK or have stepped away from the plugin entirely.
3) Some plugins are definitely abandoned. I recall Chris Pisano taking
over the foreman_banner plugin last year and struggling to get in touch
with the original author at all.
For context, Fedora does have a policy for this that makes some sense:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintai
ners
That's quite heavy, but some of the points make sense. So, do we need
to add something to our docs about this. My gut feeling is:
* Yes, we do
* Only applies to plugins in "theforeman" GitHub repo
* We need to add extra maintainers to the Rubygems *before* the author
leaves - Chris had a real issue here. This could be a requirement of
getting aplugin packaged, for example.
* We need to allow authors to "abandon" a plugin clearly (something
like how the Arch User Repository does it maybe?)
Thoughts?
Greg
In general +1. I'm not sure if official policy changes anything, probably does
not do any harm either. It would be great if someone went over all plugins
under theforeman org on github, found projects with single owner and ask the
owner to extend the list. Or someone scritped a simple check so we would avoid
this situation in future. I think what Dmitri described is fair and should
become a common practice for new repos/gems in our org.
+1
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"foreman-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
