On 07/06/16 05:18 AM, Raymond Jennings wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 12:55 AM, Robin H. Johnson <robb...@gentoo.org > <mailto:robb...@gentoo.org>> wrote: >> >> On Tue, Jun 07, 2016 at 09:44:42AM +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: >> > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:23 PM, Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org >> <mailto:mgo...@gentoo.org>> wrote: >> > > Your thoughts? >> > I would agree that proxy-maint and GH pull requests are better than >> > sunrise, and so we should probably sunset (pun intended) the latter. >> The new method is better, but that doesn't cover what to do with the >> 500+ packages in sunrise. >> >> I have found them useful in the past, when I suddenly had a need for >> something, and there was an ebuild in sunrise that I could adopt into >> the tree. > > How about simply closing sunrise to new packages, and migrate them to > elsewhere as resources permit? > > Just plugging the spigot and deprecating it would improve things. >
Isn't that effectively where we are already at though? If the last push was a full year ago, we've pretty well got a closed-tree already. I guess we just need to announce it..? As for what to do with the packages that exist already.... what about adding a p.mask to the repo with a message along the lines of: "Sunrise has been masked for removal, if you care about this package please ping its bug on bugs.gentoo.org so that we know it is a priority for migration" ..or similar?
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
