Hello, everyone. On bug #577398, Pacho has requested removing the 'Development' component that's rarely used according to its description. However, I'd rather not remove a single component when it fits the component split currently used there.
Right now we have the following components:
- Applications,
- baselayout,
- Core system,
- Development,
- Eclasses and Profiles,
- Games,
- GCC Porting,
- GNOME,
- Hardened,
- Java,
- KDE,
- Keywording & Stabilization,
- Library,
- New packages ('New ebuilds' previously),
- Printing,
- SELinux,
- Server,
- Unspecified.
This basically is a mix of two component types: functional (like
keywording, new packages...) and ebuild category (app, baselayout, core
system...).
Out of those components, GNOME, Hardened, Java, KDE and SELinux don't
go through bug-wranglers. All other components don't have a specific
default assignee.
Of course, users are pretty much confused about which component to use,
except for simple cases. The more experienced ones know that it doesn't
matter most of the time, and choose a random one.
Applications have around 100k bugs, new packages 128k (mostly wrong
filled because of the old 'ebuilds' name), other components are less
than 20k.
I would personally go for the following layout:
- All packages,
- Core system [includes baselayout],
- Eclasses and Profiles,
- GCC Porting,
- Hardened,
- Keywording & Stabilization,
- New packages ('New ebuilds' previously),
- SELinux.
The goals would be:
a. have something that would fit most bugs going through bug-wranglers
on the top,
b. leave the functional split for 'eclasses and profiles' and 'new
packages',
c. leave the special team components such as 'gcc porting', 'hardened'...
Keeping the big pseudo-category split doesn't make much sense as most
of the packages can't be fit easily into a specific group and it only
confuses users. GNOME & KDE aren't very clear either, especially for
non-core packages (like: is systemd a GNOME package?). Having them
skip bug-wranglers doesn't sound really helpful.
Your thoughts?
[1]:https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=577398
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>
pgpo1k6eMJPRO.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
