Issues with oudated ports / GitHub
larryv at macports.org
Fri Oct 7 21:00:28 PDT 2016
> On Oct 7, 2016, at 3:24 PM, Ken Cunningham <ken.cunningham.webuse at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2016-10-07, at 10:05 AM, Rainer Müller wrote:
>> I am not sure how we could change these to make triaging trickets
> I can't easily just look at the list and see what are new requests for
> ports to be included in macports. It all mixed in with other things.
You can use a Trac query for this:
The Tickets page  on Trac has links for several such queries, there is
a list of various Trac reports , and you can construct a custom query
if you need to .
It might be useful to add more query links to the Tickets page.
> Like Ryan said, I'd have separate queues for each major
That's not really what Ryan said. He was just pointing out that our
current selection of ticket types is inconsistent, not that we should
add a bunch more.
> let's see --
> new incoming port requests that anyone could claim - port that
> don't exist in macports at present
> new portfiles that have been finished and are awaiting committer
> requests for updates to existing ports by people who have
> noticed something out on the web of significance.
> port updates with patches (approved by maintainer if there is
> one) waiting for committer review
>> Requests for new ports could still be valid after years. This list
>> could be helpful for newcomers that want to create new ports.
> Totally agree - but I'd close everything over six months old or
> something like that for optics. People can still search to "closed"
> tickets if they want.
I think we have a collective hoading instinct w.r.t. tickets. (Don't
close that ticket! I might work on it one day. Really.) Perhaps we could
be more bold about closing tickets with Rainer's "lack-of-interest"
keyword, while making it easy to find all such tickets.
More information about the macports-dev