Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Improving Gentoo User Relations

[Philipp Riegger]

On Apr 7, 2006, at 11:56 AM, Jakub Moc wrote:


I bet there's a bug open for it.


http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=117482

. How's portage 2.1 getting along? I notice it gets frequent  
updates.


The gentoo-portage-dev list is the place to follow this.


Also, http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=115839


On GWN there are always things "heard on foo-ML", "heard on bar-ML"  
or "heard on te forums. But since many information seems to be in  
bugzilla, wouldn't it be nice to inform the bugzilla team of  
importagt "tracker bugs" and have a section like "heard on bugzilla"?

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Improving Gentoo User Relations

[Philipp Riegger]

On Apr 7, 2006, at 4:47 PM, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote:

On the other hand, this problem does have a solution--another  
level of

indirection.  Anybody who wishes, dev or user, could spend time
tracking Gentoo development (through bugs and the mailing lists) and
submit status reports to the GWN.  Care to volunteer?  I'd be  
happy to

provide pointers on how to get started.


I may grab you on IRC later and see if you can tell me your  
pointers, I

like his idea and I'd like to look into it!


I'm very interested in this, it would be very nice if you could write  
some type of document with some of the ideas, hints and pointers in it.


Thanks,
Philipp
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites for dev-util/cccc

[foser]

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

[Mark Loeser]

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

[Chris Bainbridge]

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

[Mike Frysinger]

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] www-servers/pound needs new maintainer

[Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen]

www-servers/pound is without an active maintainer and has an open security bug 
#118541

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=118541

Anyone willing to take care of this package in the future, please update 
metadata/herd info and CC yourself on the bug.

-- 
Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen
Gentoo Linux Security Team


pgp3Nz1LA9kWV.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo 'Images' without gcc/portage?

[Lance Albertson]

Allen Rohner wrote:

> I am looking to use Gentoo to create a standard x86 environment complete
> with apache and X, but with no gcc or portage on the target machine.
> Additionally, use the same technique to cross-compile to a ppc embedded
> system.

You might take a look at GNAP [1]. I'm not sure if that's exactly what
you're looking for, but its a really nice lightweight way of creating a
gentoo-like system w/o the things you described above. Take a look and
give it a shot :)

[1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/embedded/gnap.xml

-- 
Lance Albertson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager

---
GPG Public Key:  
Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1  4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742

ramereth/irc.freenode.net



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: last rites for app-mobilephone/openobex-apps

[Henrik Brix Andersen]

On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 02:06:00AM +0300, Alin Nastac wrote:
> dev-libs/openobex-1.2 is now in the tree.

Why did you p.mask openobex-apps before openobex-1.2 is stable?

./Brix
-- 
Henrik Brix Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd


pgpD05qBotCsV.pgp
Description: PGP signature