The problem is, trying to fix ebuilds in tree is a lot more complicated.. You have to fight with multiple herds, and multiple developers, and explain to them why it should occur, in order to get anything to happen.. In addition, even a global gigantic one liner to add quotes to $D and $S would cause huge rsync loads... which makes the mirror admins hate you... Combine this with the first issue, and just improving the incoming ebuilds and hoping that the devs watching this list pay attention, and make some of these changes in newly added ebuilds, will improve the quality of the tree slowly.
If a user submits an ebuild, they should be prepared to make fixes to bring it up to a standard. Many of the ebuilds do not even follow ebuild-submit.xml, and the maintainer fixing them only causes more problems for other maintainers further down, assuming the user submits multiple ebuilds. Once they learn the rules, later ebuilds will hopefully be up to the same standards. On 9/12/05, Carsten Lohrke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Monday 12 September 2005 19:56, Jakub Moc wrote: > > Since you said above, that you really don't care if those user-submitted > > ebuilds will ever get into portage or will stay in maintainer-wanted > queue > > forever and that's the stuff in portage that actually matters QA-wise, > I'm > > missing why are you worried about people not submitting their ebuilds any > > more. > > Two points: > > 1. The biggest share of maintenance isn't getting an ebuild right, but the > ongoing effort keeping it up to date, applying patches, interact with > upstream developers, test, stabilize,... To me it absolutely doesn't matter, > > if an ebuild is broken or not before taking into account to maintain it. > > 2. People are interested in applications, but may not have the skills or > interest to get an ebuild 100% perfect. WONTFIX will look like PISSOFF for > them. I think we just look a bit petty-minded. > > > > At the very least, reviewing user-submitted ebuilds and marking things > > WONTFIX/CANTFIX/REVIEWED makes it possible to filter out the outdated and > > dead-upstream crap, as well as things about which those people who filed > > the bugs don't care any more. And, if someone picks those ebuilds up and > > decides to maintain them, he can focus more on testing the actual app > then > > fixing a broken ebuild (or even committing a broken ebuild into the > tree). > > As I said: Ebuilds in Portage should be reviewed before you think about > those > in bugzilla. > > > Carsten > > -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
