I thought about it. I think that is possible to have a tracking system. Where people would send the ports, have some minimal auto-check of common errors and to give some people the rights to ask for fix some things, report test results, commit to the CVS or just reject the port. The thing is that ports@ doesn't seem to be that structured, is more chaotic but thanks to that is also more free for the people to select what to review, test or commit. I think that the only "problem" is when the ports gets lost in the noise of the list, for example, I like to help testing when I can and not having a list of ports looking for testing is kind of annoying, maybe things would get committed faster with people giving test results.
I would like to make the "submission tracking system", I even thought about interfacing it with the mailing list, but for now I'm trying to help here and be sure about the workings of the current system before doing something that doesn't get used. Cheers. Elias. 2018-07-03 11:34 GMT-03:00 Stuart Henderson <s...@spacehopper.org>: > On 2018/07/03 01:01, Mike Burns wrote: >> On 2018-07-02 18.02.08 -0500, Edward Lopez-Acosta wrote: >> > Is there another way ports are tracked besides the mailing list so >> > anyone can find a status without searching the archives? >> >> Not really, no. Mailing list archive + CVS repo are the best we have >> right now. It's not that no one wants this to change, but the change >> itself requires a lot of work. >> >> Really long, slightly ongoing, thread on how we could improve this, from >> misc@: https://marc.info/?l=openbsd-misc&m=149789110906191&w=2 >> >> (That thread starts as being about bugs@ but ports is mentioned >> somewhere in there, and the same concepts and concerns apply.) > > In which people who don't understand what is needed of a tracking system > (thinking it is a software/technical thing needing doing rather than an > ongoing management thing) try to set one up ... > > Mostly the people that understand the task don't have the time/inclination > to do it for a hobby. > >> > I know I have some submissions which I fixed up upon request but no >> > idea if they were merged, and they are pending in the jasperla GitHub. >> > Additionally, there may be half done ports already out there that were >> > not merged, pending changes, no sense in people starting over on these >> >> The jasperla GitHub repo is convenient and nice for communicating >> whether someone is working on a difficult port, but it is not a source >> of truth. >> >> Note that I am just an observer (and port maintainer). >> -Mike >> > > Exactly, jasper@'s openbsd-wip repo isn't about tracking submissions, it's > a place people can do some (possibly collaborative) work *before* it's > ready, but when things there are in shape tarballs or cvs diffs should still > be sent to ports@ as usual. >
