[MacPorts] #16551: p5-mac-carbon does not install without forcing (-f)

[C. Florian Ebeling]

On Thu, Oct 2, 2008 at 12:04 PM, Ryan Schmidt <ryandesign at macports.org> wrote:
> On Oct 2, 2008, at 4:51 AM, Rainer Müller wrote:
>> Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>>>
>>> I think the discussion was about changing the maintainer timeout, not
>>> abandoning it, but I don't think it got anywhere. It's still
>>> documented in the Guide that if a maintainer does not respond to a
>>> ticket in 72 hours, anybody else can take it, and I recommend still
>>> following that rule.
>>
>> But it is also documented that if the maintainer does not respond in
>> three weeks, the port should be considered abandoned.
>>
>> <http://guide.macports.org/#project.update-policies.abandonment>
>>
>> But if tickets are always picked up after 72h, there will never be the
>> three weeks timeout and the unresponding maintainer will never be
>> removed...
>
> Yes, I do agree the port abandonment procedure is in conflict with the
> maintainer timeout rule. I think the timeout rule is fine; we just need a
> better abandonment procedure.
>
> It currently says if a maintainer has not acknowledged a ticket within 3
> weeks, then a new port abandonment ticket should be filed, and that the port
> abandonment ticket can be acted upon immediately to assign a new maintainer.
> I propose this be changed so that if there are n or more tickets about a
> maintainer's ports that he has not acknowledged, and it has been more than
> 72 hours since they were filed, then a new port abandonment ticket should be
> filed and assigned to the maintainer. If the maintainer does not respond to
> that ticket within 3 weeks, then the port is considered abandoned. n could
> be some number between, say, 2 and 5. How about a nice round 3?

the number of ports this maintainer is responsible for has to
go into the equation as well I guess. Otherwise one-port-maintainers
have indefinite grace period :)

but to be honest I find this whole Abandonment procedure a bit draconian
and scary. Why not just make a rule that says that after more than 72 hours
a port becomes openmaintainer? maybe that was discussed already in the
other thread, though. but I would not really file abandonment to fix a bug
in a port I'm marginally interested in.

and only when you are really angry with the oblivious maintainer or really
interested in this particular port, you would file the abandonment ticket.

maybe then this whole abandonment procedure should be relevant to all
ports of a maintainer, though, because when you do not respond to the
abandoned ticket, this person is clearly no longer interested in macports
in general. the least one would expect would be to acknowledge that you
don't want or cannot do maintenance any longer and officially remove you
maintainer entry.

that's even more draconian than though :)

what I take away for this example is is that I can fix it.

Florian

-- 
Florian Ebeling
florian.ebeling at gmail.com