On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 07:30:25PM -0400, Alec Warner wrote: > So we created this awesome alias to put ebuilds that need a maintainer. > Good idea at the time, decent idea still. The problem? We have nearly > 2000 open bugs assigned to maintainer-wanted[1]. I would like to > discuss policy on these. Do we keep them, do we get a group of people > to slowly review and discard them? Do we mind having a ton of things > open like this (a quasi-ebuild db of sorts). Is bugs the right place > FOR THIs sort of thing, or can we improve somewhere/how? Could we establish policies for closing them or leaving them to sit open?
- Upstream dead, previously submitted URLs no longer functional (yes, there are actually some like this!). - No ebuild included. - Upstream says obsolete in favour of another package. - Dev notes obsolete in favour of another package - suggest it to the submitter, and see what they say. - Major unresolved security issues. - Excessive complexity / unsuitable for ebuild installs (eg apps that are meant to be built and run from the same directory). I'm in favour of leaving stuff sitting there, until a developer with a need comes along (I wouldn't use an untrusted tree even if there was one). At the same time, existing developers and teams should be encouraged to look at those under maintainer-wanted, and consider stuff there. I try to keep an eye out for app-backup and other fields that I'm involved in. -- Robin Hugh Johnson E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
pgpEHE0qwEgfq.pgp
Description: PGP signature
