Mart Raudsepp wrote:
The maintainer-wanted team owns that foo package then, which is why
having a different mail alias than the existing one for "new package
requests that aren't in gentoo tree yet" would be a good idea.
Ok, I think I see where you're coming from. Essentially
maintainer-wanted is a group for people who want to collectively manage
ebuilds that don't otherwise fall into any particular project/herd.
Almost like a "misc" herd.
If the packages are actually being maintained then I have no issues at
all with the proposal - in fact I'd endorse it (for what little that is
worth). However "maintainer-wanted" seems like a bit of a misnomer -
these ebuilds would in fact have a maintainer. Perhaps another name
could be used so that it is easy to distinguish between:
1. Packages not in the tree (bugzilla requests/etc).
2. Packages in the tree that truly nobody is caring for.
3. Packages in the tree that the proposed project is caring for but
would love to see adopted into another herd/project.
4. Packages that are part of a more dedicated project/herd, or which
have attention from one or more particular developers.
I don't question the value in having group #3 which I think is what
you're proposing. But, perhaps it should have a specific name/alias so
that we can tell that a package belongs to it. Your proposed team could
scour #1/2 for new builds, and bump builds in #3 back to #2 if
necessary. Treecleaners would prune #2 and ignore #3. Of course,
cooperation with Sunrise would also be a plus.
