Re: [gentoo-dev] Empty herd: sgml

2010-03-22 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Sunday 21 March 2010 17:22:55 Thomas Sachau wrote:
 Am 21.03.2010 18:06, schrieb Mike Frysinger:
  On Sunday 21 March 2010 08:41:15 Thomas Sachau wrote:
  I see, that the sgml herd seems to be empty for a longer time, so i
  would like to ask, if someone wants to take that herd and the related
  ebuilds and bugs over or if we should delete that herd and assign
  related ebuilds/bugs to m-n.
  
  if someone were to step up, we'd have to undo any changes we just did. 
  why not add m-n to the herd definition.
 
 What exactly do you suggest?
 
 My suggestion is to give people some time to join that herd (which had open
 bugs back from 2006!) for some time and if nothing happens, remove this
 unused herd and assign bugs and ebuilds to m-n, so people at least see,
 that those ebuilds are not maintained, instead of getting the false
 impression of maintainership by an empty herd.

deleting logical herds and updating all the xml files takes effort, as does 
reverting those changes when someone steps up.  from what i can see, there is 
no gain doing this.

simple mark the herd itself as m-n, update the staffing needs page, and then 
re-assign the bugs to m-n while keeping sgml herd in the cc.
-mike


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Re: [gentoo-dev] Empty herd: sgml

2010-03-22 Thread Alex Alexander
On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 02:25:43AM -0100, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
 Here is a list of the packages that would be moved to maintainer-wanted:
 
 app-doc/halibut
 app-office/passepartout
 app-text/asciidoc
 app-text/build-docbook-catalog
 app-text/docbook2X
 app-text/docbook-dsssl-stylesheets
 app-text/docbook-sgml-dtd
 app-text/docbook-sgml
 app-text/docbook-sgml-utils
 app-text/docbook-xml-dtd
 app-text/docbook-xml-simple-dtd
 app-text/docbook-xsl-stylesheets
 app-text/gentoo-guide-xml-dtd
 app-text/grutatxt
 app-text/html2text
 app-text/html401
 app-text/htmlrecode
 app-text/htmltidy
 app-text/html-xml-utils
 app-text/linuxdoc-tools
 app-text/openjade
 app-text/opensp
 app-text/robodoc
 app-text/sablotron
 app-text/sgml-common
 app-text/sgmltools-lite
 app-text/sgrep
 app-text/txt2tags
 app-text/xhtml1
 app-text/xml2doc
 app-text/xml2
 app-text/xmlformat
 app-text/xmlstarlet
 app-text/xmlto
 www-client/htmlview
 
 
 The following packages would be dropped to the remaining maintainers:
 
 app-emacs/nxml-mode (emacs)
 app-emacs/psgml (emacs)
 app-text/gnome-doc-utils (gnome)
 app-text/highlight (tex)
 app-text/scrollkeeper-dtd (gnome)
 app-text/scrollkeeper (gnome)
 app-text/webgen (ruby)
 dev-ruby/xml-simple (ruby)

A lot of useful stuff here.

I've added myself and tampakrap to the sgml herd,
we'll try to keep it in good shape :)

-- 
Alex Alexander :: wired
Gentoo Developer
www.linuxized.com


pgpug5W71Iomd.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[gentoo-dev] Lastrite app-forensics/samhain

2010-03-22 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

# Tomáš Chvátal scarab...@gentoo.org (22 Mar 2010)
# QA: removal on 22. 5. 2010
# Masked for removal due to major packaging issues
# that were not addressed by maintainers in timely
# manner. See bug #150091.
app-forensics/samhain
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAkunjicACgkQHB6c3gNBRYe1yQCeLB6YlbqeByPhSRNVQMmEkpSg
DOIAmQEON1ibqyQcdYspfEaL9qHrjsmA
=uZ3x
-END PGP SIGNATURE-



Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Packages pulling in python-3*, also they dont require it

2010-03-22 Thread Jacob Godserv
On Sat, Mar 20, 2010 at 10:11, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
arfre...@gentoo.org wrote:
 2010-03-20 01:51:44 Duncan napisał(a):
 So let's just recognize that it's not a perfect situation, create a news
 item saying that python-3 will soon (give a date) be unmasked, and suggest
 that users not needing it may wish to package.mask it themselves, with a
 link to documentation with specific instructions and a bit more detail on
 why they might wish to mask it and under what circumstances they might not.

 I'd suggest an unmasking date 30 days after the release of the news item.

 Python 3 is not masked. The discussion is about stabilization.

Duncan's comments still apply, though, right? What's against writing a
news item about stabilizing Python?

-- 
Jacob

For then there will be great distress, unequaled
from the beginning of the world until now — and never
to be equaled again. If those days had not been cut
short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the
elect those days will be shortened.

Are you ready?