Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 16:42 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: well the logical thing would be to go to bugzilla and search for ... and guess what ? no more open bug reports I already did that when I wrote it, actually there still is an open bug for it. So I guess you didn't actually go trough these proposed steps yourself. Anyway, it is completely besides the point, because you or anyone else won't check a week or a month from now if there's bug filed against , that is what maintenance is about. I mean, you aren't the maintainer. And there is still the outstanding issue that it is unmaintained in Gentoo, are you going to fix that or not ? Otherwise it should be masked and removed. this is the same argument as already made and rejected ... Where was this rejected and by whom ? By you I guess ? That just doesn't cut it, errors made in the past are no reason to make them again in the future. feel free to mask and remove the hundreds of other packages that have no maintainer So now we do have your blessing ? is then up for removal as of this moment. - foser signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
On 18/04/06, foser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 16:42 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: well the logical thing would be to go to bugzilla and search for ... and guess what ? no more open bug reports I already did that when I wrote it, actually there still is an open bug for it. So I guess you didn't actually go trough these proposed steps yourself. Anyway, it is completely besides the point, because you or anyone else won't check a week or a month from now if there's bug filed against , that is what maintenance is about. Are you suggesting that all packages with long standing open bug reports should be removed? There are thousands that fit that description. If not, then what is your definition of maintained? It could be argued that since Mike fixed the bug, it is maintained, even though he isn't the maintainer. Likewise, there are hundreds of packages that have a maintainer listed, or are assigned to a herd, where bug reports are essentially ignored. Should those also be removed? I mean, you aren't the maintainer. And there is still the outstanding issue that it is unmaintained in Gentoo, are you going to fix that or not ? Otherwise it should be masked and removed. this is the same argument as already made and rejected ... Where was this rejected and by whom ? By you I guess ? That just doesn't cut it, errors made in the past are no reason to make them again in the future. Did you read the previous discussion link I provided? The argument has been rejected in the past because it would lead to hundreds of otherwise working packages being removed. feel free to mask and remove the hundreds of other packages that have no maintainer So now we do have your blessing ? is then up for removal as of this moment. Maybe you aren't a native English speaker; it was clear from Mike's post that he would rather you didn't go ahead with removing hundreds of packages. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 14:11 +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote: Are you suggesting that all packages with long standing open bug reports should be removed? There are thousands that fit that description. If not, then what is your definition of maintained? It could be argued that since Mike fixed the bug, it is maintained, even though he isn't the maintainer. Likewise, there are hundreds of packages that have a maintainer listed, or are assigned to a herd, where bug reports are essentially ignored. Should those also be removed? No, I don't know why you jump to that conclusion. There are people responsible there, you can contact them if you feel things are ignored. Or better, you can try and help out on those outstanding bugs and solve them, so the maintainers would only need to apply a fix. Did you read the previous discussion link I provided? The argument has been rejected in the past because it would lead to hundreds of otherwise working packages being removed. You get a lot more out of that thread than I do, I guess it's a matter of interpretation. Maybe you aren't a native English speaker; it was clear from Mike's post that he would rather you didn't go ahead with removing hundreds of packages. I don't know how this relates to my mother tongue, but I'm not speaking of a mass removal or anything. You make it into that all the time, maybe you should let go of that mindset. I think that if we come across cases like this the goal should be to clear up the confusion. Either find a maintainer or clean it out. That way eventually 'hundreds' becomes 'dozens' of unmaintained packages and maybe some day even less, it's a gradual process. - foser signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
On Tuesday 18 April 2006 07:00, foser wrote: On Sun, 2006-04-16 at 16:42 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: well the logical thing would be to go to bugzilla and search for ... and guess what ? no more open bug reports I already did that when I wrote it, actually there still is an open bug for it. the open bug is about porting it to OS X ... those porting bugs dont count as the OS X team resolves them, not the maintainers you'll find a ton of other such bugs which maintainers dont care or want to hear about the issues -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
On Tuesday 18 April 2006 09:51, foser wrote: On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 14:11 +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote: Maybe you aren't a native English speaker; it was clear from Mike's post that he would rather you didn't go ahead with removing hundreds of packages. I don't know how this relates to my mother tongue, but I'm not speaking of a mass removal or anything. You make it into that all the time, maybe you should let go of that mindset. either you have a policy of cutting unmaintained packages or you dont ... you cant have some vague middle ground -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 10:22 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: either you have a policy of cutting unmaintained packages or you dont ... you cant have some vague middle ground Hide behind policy if you can't do it with common sense. The policy is to add valid metadata.xml data to packages that do not have it, that has not been done here. Adding 'maintainer-needed' (or 'no-herd') as a way out is not sufficient and was never intended policy when metadata/herds got introduced. - foser signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
On Tuesday 18 April 2006 10:41, foser wrote: On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 10:22 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: either you have a policy of cutting unmaintained packages or you dont ... you cant have some vague middle ground Hide behind policy if you can't do it with common sense. dont know what policy you're referring to seeing as how we dont have any concerning unmaintained packages common sense says leave the package along if there are no open issues The policy is to add valid metadata.xml data to packages that do not have it sure, for new packages ... isnt a new package -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
foser wrote: On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 10:22 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: either you have a policy of cutting unmaintained packages or you dont ... you cant have some vague middle ground Hide behind policy if you can't do it with common sense. The policy is to add valid metadata.xml data to packages that do not have it, that has not been done here. Adding 'maintainer-needed' (or 'no-herd') as a way out is not sufficient and was never intended policy when metadata/herds got introduced. - foser If no one has an objection, I'll pick up that package, I think it is fun, never tought I'd use it, but I have so much code written I'd like how much I have really done. If there is no objection I'll make the update needed, create metadata, make repoman happy. Phil -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 10:53 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: dont know what policy you're referring to seeing as how we dont have any concerning unmaintained packages Still hiding... c'mon you are better than this. sure, for new packages ... isnt a new package The policy concerning metadata makes no difference between new/(un)maintained. It just says that every package should have one. So if you come across a pack that doesn't and you touch it, you need to fix that. - foser signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 17:56 +0300, Philippe Trottier wrote: If no one has an objection, I'll pick up that package, I think it is fun, never tought I'd use it, but I have so much code written I'd like how much I have really done. If there is no objection I'll make the update needed, create metadata, make repoman happy. Go right ahead. - foser signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
foser wrote: On Tue, 2006-04-18 at 17:56 +0300, Philippe Trottier wrote: If no one has an objection, I'll pick up that package, I think it is fun, never tought I'd use it, but I have so much code written I'd like how much I have really done. If there is no objection I'll make the update needed, create metadata, make repoman happy. Go right ahead. - foser CVS commit complete. RepoMan sez: If everyone were like you, I'd be out of business! Phil -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 14:24 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: and it helps no one to go around cutting packages that have no outstanding issues with them Sure it helps keep Gentoo clean and up-to-date, the load of packages that are outdated are often unmaintained as well. The one leads to the other. Anyway, nobody would know about outstanding issues that popped up, because there is no maintainer to assign them to. there was an outstanding issue with , but i resolved that How do you know you resolved it, you don't get bugreports on it do you ? I mean, you aren't the maintainer. And there is still the outstanding issue that it is unmaintained in Gentoo, are you going to fix that or not ? Otherwise it should be masked and removed. - foser signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
On Sunday 16 April 2006 11:17, foser wrote: On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 14:24 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: and it helps no one to go around cutting packages that have no outstanding issues with them Sure it helps keep Gentoo clean and up-to-date, the load of packages that are outdated are often unmaintained as well. The one leads to the other. Anyway, nobody would know about outstanding issues that popped up, because there is no maintainer to assign them to. and then people send out last-rites notices in those cases there was an outstanding issue with , but i resolved that How do you know you resolved it, you don't get bugreports on it do you ? well the logical thing would be to go to bugzilla and search for ... and guess what ? no more open bug reports I mean, you aren't the maintainer. And there is still the outstanding issue that it is unmaintained in Gentoo, are you going to fix that or not ? Otherwise it should be masked and removed. this is the same argument as already made and rejected ... feel free to mask and remove the hundreds of other packages that have no maintainer -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
-3.1.4 now in portage -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 02:54 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: -3.1.4 now in portage Why did you add that, without adding metadata ? That is just wrong. It is better to remove it if there is no maintainer, you upping it without adding yourself as maintainer is no form of maintenance. This is exactly why we get complaints about a stale tree. I still say it should be removed in 30 days. - foser signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
foser [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: On Sat, 2006-04-15 at 02:54 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: -3.1.4 now in portage Why did you add that, without adding metadata ? That is just wrong. It is better to remove it if there is no maintainer, you upping it without adding yourself as maintainer is no form of maintenance. This is exactly why we get complaints about a stale tree. I still say it should be removed in 30 days. I agree. There is a lot of stuff that suffers from being unmaintained, and I think we should strive towards cleaning that up. It helps no one if there isn't anyone to claim responsibility for the package when there is a problem. Just my 2 cents, -- Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86) email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/ http://www.halcy0n.com pgpWuteUOvDz6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
On 15/04/06, Mark Loeser [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: foser [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: I still say it should be removed in 30 days. I agree. There is a lot of stuff that suffers from being unmaintained, and I think we should strive towards cleaning that up. It helps no one if there isn't anyone to claim responsibility for the package when there is a problem. This discussion comes up every six months or so. See http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/32484 for the beginnings of a list of unmaintained packages... -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
On Saturday 15 April 2006 12:07, Mark Loeser wrote: I agree. There is a lot of stuff that suffers from being unmaintained, and I think we should strive towards cleaning that up. It helps no one if there isn't anyone to claim responsibility for the package when there is a problem. and it helps no one to go around cutting packages that have no outstanding issues with them there was an outstanding issue with , but i resolved that -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc
dev-util/ is not depended on by any other applications, the stable version does not compile, and while upstream has newer releases which most likely work...there is no Gentoo maintainer (bug #128109). If no one steps up to maintain it in 30 days, I will be removing it. -- Mark Loeser - Gentoo Developer (cpp gcc-porting qa toolchain x86) email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://dev.gentoo.org/~halcy0n/ http://www.halcy0n.com pgpSY0RK1vejQ.pgp Description: PGP signature
