Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft

[Daniel Campbell]

On 01/31/2017 09:08 AM, David Seifert wrote:
> On Tue, 2017-01-31 at 17:34 +0100, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>> On 01/31/2017 03:50 PM, Georg Rudoy wrote:
>>> I'll make a new release of leechcraft itself and bump the version
>>> to
>>> that new one, so they'll naturally be dropped to unstable, 0.6.70
>>> and
>>> earlier (if any) indeed could be removed. Most of the bugs, as I
>>> saw
>>> them, are due to the current last released version being 2.5 years
>>> old
>>> and obviously bitrotten somewhat since then.
>>
>> I'd still recommend spending a bit of time to consider whether this
>> doesn't fit better in an overlay, which would also make it easier to
>> maintain without overburdening proxy maint given the number of
>> packages
>> involved.
>>
> 
> I really second this - we can ask infra to get you an overlay. Should
> it turn out that you are truly maintaining stuff, we can then merge it
> into the tree.
> 
I'd like to third it. Overlays are a great way for people (users and
devs alike) to try their hand maintaining their own Portage tree. It's
great practice and it gives you a single place to reference for people
who are using your ebuilds.

If it gets formally into layman, I believe our bugzy will cover you,
too, in case you don't want to use github. I'd ask infra just to be sure.

Overlays for Gentoo are comparable to Debian's and Ubuntu's PPAs and are
similarly simple to install/use/delete.

-- 
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C  1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft

[David Seifert]

On Tue, 2017-01-31 at 17:34 +0100, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> On 01/31/2017 03:50 PM, Georg Rudoy wrote:
> > I'll make a new release of leechcraft itself and bump the version
> > to
> > that new one, so they'll naturally be dropped to unstable, 0.6.70
> > and
> > earlier (if any) indeed could be removed. Most of the bugs, as I
> > saw
> > them, are due to the current last released version being 2.5 years
> > old
> > and obviously bitrotten somewhat since then.
> 
> I'd still recommend spending a bit of time to consider whether this
> doesn't fit better in an overlay, which would also make it easier to
> maintain without overburdening proxy maint given the number of
> packages
> involved.
> 

I really second this - we can ask infra to get you an overlay. Should
it turn out that you are truly maintaining stuff, we can then merge it
into the tree.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft

[Kristian Fiskerstrand]

On 01/31/2017 03:50 PM, Georg Rudoy wrote:
> I'll make a new release of leechcraft itself and bump the version to
> that new one, so they'll naturally be dropped to unstable, 0.6.70 and
> earlier (if any) indeed could be removed. Most of the bugs, as I saw
> them, are due to the current last released version being 2.5 years old
> and obviously bitrotten somewhat since then.

I'd still recommend spending a bit of time to consider whether this
doesn't fit better in an overlay, which would also make it easier to
maintain without overburdening proxy maint given the number of packages
involved.

-- 
Kristian Fiskerstrand
OpenPGP keyblock reachable at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net
fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft

[Davide Pesavento]

On Tue, Jan 31, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Georg Rudoy <0xd34df...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 2017-01-31 3:22 GMT-05:00 David Seifert :
>> Proxy-maint has always been there, so no real excuse for all those bugs
>> rotting away.
>
> I didn't bother with finding another maint who'd proxy it for me,
> yeah, that's my bad.
>
>
>> Here's the deal: If you fix all those bugs within the 30
>> day time period, we'll keep it in the tree. Please also modernize the
>> eclass a bit, and preferably drop all ebuilds to unstable.
>
> I'll make a new release of leechcraft itself and bump the version to
> that new one, so they'll naturally be dropped to unstable, 0.6.70 and
> earlier (if any) indeed could be removed. Most of the bugs, as I saw
> them, are due to the current last released version being 2.5 years old
> and obviously bitrotten somewhat since then.
>
> The ebuilds I have around use multibuild to build both qt4 and qt5
> versions according to use flags. Is that still relevant, or the world
> has migrated to qt5 and the benefit of still supporting qt4 is not
> worth the effort and clumsiness?

Yeah, drop qt4 please.

Thanks,
Davide

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft

[Georg Rudoy]

2017-01-31 3:22 GMT-05:00 David Seifert :
> Proxy-maint has always been there, so no real excuse for all those bugs
> rotting away.

I didn't bother with finding another maint who'd proxy it for me,
yeah, that's my bad.


> Here's the deal: If you fix all those bugs within the 30
> day time period, we'll keep it in the tree. Please also modernize the
> eclass a bit, and preferably drop all ebuilds to unstable.

I'll make a new release of leechcraft itself and bump the version to
that new one, so they'll naturally be dropped to unstable, 0.6.70 and
earlier (if any) indeed could be removed. Most of the bugs, as I saw
them, are due to the current last released version being 2.5 years old
and obviously bitrotten somewhat since then.

The ebuilds I have around use multibuild to build both qt4 and qt5
versions according to use flags. Is that still relevant, or the world
has migrated to qt5 and the benefit of still supporting qt4 is not
worth the effort and clumsiness?

> Send all your PRs via Github, mentioning my handle @SoapGentoo.

Thanks, will do.


-- 
  Georg Rudoy

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft

[David Seifert]

On Mon, 2017-01-30 at 17:43 -0500, Georg Rudoy wrote:
> 2017-01-30 13:35 GMT-05:00 David Seifert :
> > Please do not resurrect leechcraft unless you're willing to fix the
> > bugs with GCC 5 (and GCC 6) and newer dependencies. Personally, I
> > feel
> > leechcraft should probably live in an overlay instead of the tree.
> 
> I was previously proxy-maintaining it via Maxim Koltsov aka
> maksbotan.
> What's the best way for me to step up and maintain it more directly?
> Would PRs on github work?
> 
> 

Proxy-maint has always been there, so no real excuse for all those bugs
rotting away. Here's the deal: If you fix all those bugs within the 30
day time period, we'll keep it in the tree. Please also modernize the
eclass a bit, and preferably drop all ebuilds to unstable. Send all
your PRs via Github, mentioning my handle @SoapGentoo. Given that this
leechcraft ecosystem has a very small, dedicated community, I think
maintaining it in a separate overlay, pulled in by layman or whatever
would still be a better approach.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft

[Georg Rudoy]

2017-01-30 13:35 GMT-05:00 David Seifert :
> Please do not resurrect leechcraft unless you're willing to fix the
> bugs with GCC 5 (and GCC 6) and newer dependencies. Personally, I feel
> leechcraft should probably live in an overlay instead of the tree.

I was previously proxy-maintaining it via Maxim Koltsov aka maksbotan.
What's the best way for me to step up and maintain it more directly?
Would PRs on github work?


-- 
  Georg Rudoy

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: leechcraft

[David Seifert]

Please do not resurrect leechcraft unless you're willing to fix the
bugs with GCC 5 (and GCC 6) and newer dependencies. Personally, I feel
leechcraft should probably live in an overlay instead of the tree.

# David Seifert  (30 Jan 2017)
# No maintainer activity since git migration, dated eclass
# Multiple open bugs, with no activity:
# 499176, 501170, 521072, 538156, 562300, 562476, 563714,
# 586464, 587862, 588890, 602294, 603556, 607004
# Masked for removal in 30 days.
app-leechcraft/laretz
app-leechcraft/lc-advancednotifications
app-leechcraft/lc-aggregator
app-leechcraft/lc-anhero
app-leechcraft/lc-auscrie
app-leechcraft/lc-azoth
app-leechcraft/lc-bittorrent
app-leechcraft/lc-blasq
app-leechcraft/lc-blogique
app-leechcraft/lc-certmgr
app-leechcraft/lc-core
app-leechcraft/lc-cpuload
app-leechcraft/lc-cstp
app-leechcraft/lc-dbusmanager
app-leechcraft/lc-deadlyrics
app-leechcraft/lc-devmon
app-leechcraft/lc-dolozhee
app-leechcraft/lc-eleeminator
app-leechcraft/lc-fenet
app-leechcraft/lc-gacts
app-leechcraft/lc-glance
app-leechcraft/lc-gmailnotifier
app-leechcraft/lc-historyholder
app-leechcraft/lc-hotsensors
app-leechcraft/lc-hotstreams
app-leechcraft/lc-htthare
app-leechcraft/lc-imgaste
app-leechcraft/lc-intermutko
app-leechcraft/lc-kbswitch
app-leechcraft/lc-kinotify
app-leechcraft/lc-knowhow
app-leechcraft/lc-krigstask
app-leechcraft/lc-lackman
app-leechcraft/lc-lastfmscrobble
app-leechcraft/lc-laughty
app-leechcraft/lc-launchy
app-leechcraft/lc-lemon
app-leechcraft/lc-lhtr
app-leechcraft/lc-liznoo
app-leechcraft/lc-lmp
app-leechcraft/lc-mellonetray
app-leechcraft/lc-monocle
app-leechcraft/lc-musiczombie
app-leechcraft/lc-nacheku
app-leechcraft/lc-netstoremanager
app-leechcraft/lc-networkmonitor
app-leechcraft/lc-newlife
app-leechcraft/lc-ooronee
app-leechcraft/lc-otlozhu
app-leechcraft/lcpackgen
app-leechcraft/lc-pintab
app-leechcraft/lc-pogooglue
app-leechcraft/lc-popishu
app-leechcraft/lc-poshuku
app-leechcraft/lc-qrosp
app-leechcraft/lc-rosenthal
app-leechcraft/lc-sb2
app-leechcraft/lc-scroblibre
app-leechcraft/lc-secman
app-leechcraft/lc-seekthru
app-leechcraft/lc-summary
app-leechcraft/lc-sysnotify
app-leechcraft/lc-tabsessmanager
app-leechcraft/lc-tabslist
app-leechcraft/lc-touchstreams
app-leechcraft/lc-tpi
app-leechcraft/lc-vgrabber
app-leechcraft/lc-vrooby
app-leechcraft/lc-xproxy
app-leechcraft/lc-xtazy
app-leechcraft/leechcraft-meta
app-leechcraft/liblaretz
virtual/leechcraft-browser
virtual/leechcraft-downloader-http
virtual/leechcraft-notifier
virtual/leechcraft-quark-sideprovider
virtual/leechcraft-search-show
virtual/leechcraft-storage-device-manager
virtual/leechcraft-task-show
virtual/leechcraft-trayarea
virtual/leechcraft-wysiwyg-editor