[yast-devel] who is the maintainer?
Hi, while reassigning yast-maintainers bugs I noticed that once again the maintainer/bugowner information is inconsistent: The content of the MAINTAINER file in git differs from the output of 'osc maintainer' or 'osc bugowner'. This leads to confusion. We had this problem before and apparently fail to solve the inconsistency long term. So I propose to drop the MAINTAINER file in git and rely on osc. Instead we can have a AUTHORS files so that people not knowing about osc can still reach the authors. Regards, Arvin -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org
while reassigning yast-maintainers bugs I noticed that once again the maintainer/bugowner information is inconsistent: The content of the MAINTAINER file in git differs from the output of 'osc maintainer' or 'osc bugowner'. This leads to confusion.
We had this problem before and apparently fail to solve the inconsistency long term. So I propose to drop the MAINTAINER file in git and rely on osc.
+1. I personally use mostly osc anyway.
Michal -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 11:48:06 +0100 Arvin Schnell <aschnell@suse.de> wrote:
Hi,
while reassigning yast-maintainers bugs I noticed that once again the maintainer/bugowner information is inconsistent: The content of the MAINTAINER file in git differs from the output of 'osc maintainer' or 'osc bugowner'. This leads to confusion.
We had this problem before and apparently fail to solve the inconsistency long term. So I propose to drop the MAINTAINER file in git and rely on osc.
Instead we can have a AUTHORS files so that people not knowing about osc can still reach the authors.
Regards, Arvin
I agree. AUTHORS can be also useful to get list of people that can potentionally have some knowledge when maintainer is not available. Josef -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org
Dne 9.1.2014 13:16, Josef Reidinger napsal(a):
On Thu, 9 Jan 2014 11:48:06 +0100 Arvin Schnell <aschnell@suse.de> wrote:
Hi,
while reassigning yast-maintainers bugs I noticed that once again the maintainer/bugowner information is inconsistent: The content of the MAINTAINER file in git differs from the output of 'osc maintainer' or 'osc bugowner'. This leads to confusion.
We had this problem before and apparently fail to solve the inconsistency long term. So I propose to drop the MAINTAINER file in git and rely on osc.
Instead we can have a AUTHORS files so that people not knowing about osc can still reach the authors.
Often even AUTHORS file may not be helpful as authors of the code are not reachable or interested in it anymore. This fact is not noticeable from reading the AUTHORS file. Which might be really frustrating for someone not familiar with the names/persons. In such case it's always better to have an anonymous 'yast-maintainer' than a list of person names to be chased via email (in case the file contains any). If we don't have any maintainer for a package, then it would be more helpful to put there some notice about this mailing list and let people ask questions here. vlado
Regards, Arvin
I agree. AUTHORS can be also useful to get list of people that can potentionally have some knowledge when maintainer is not available.
Josef
Often even AUTHORS file may not be helpful as authors of the code are not reachable or interested in it anymore. This fact is not noticeable from reading the AUTHORS file. Which might be really frustrating for someone not familiar with the names/persons.
In such case it's always better to have an anonymous 'yast-maintainer' than a list of person names to be chased via email (in case the file contains any).
Screening team (for example) often use changes file as a source of spam list anyway. Michal Filka -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org
Dne 9.1.2014 13:16, Josef Reidinger napsal(a):
We had this problem before and apparently fail to solve the inconsistency long term. So I propose to drop the MAINTAINER file in git and rely on osc.
Instead we can have a AUTHORS files so that people not knowing about osc can still reach the authors.
I agree with (re)moving MAINTAINER files, they are usually not correct and we should have just _one_ authoritative source for this information. IMHO 'osc bugowner' should be preferred.
I agree. AUTHORS can be also useful to get list of people that can potentionally have some knowledge when maintainer is not available.
For this purpose I check *.changes and/or "git log" to see who, when, how often... did some changes, that should help to find the most relevant developers. -- Ladislav Slezák Appliance department / YaST Developer Lihovarská 1060/12 190 00 Prague 9 / Czech Republic tel: +420 284 028 960 lslezak@suse.com SUSE -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 11:48:06AM +0100, Arvin Schnell wrote:
while reassigning yast-maintainers bugs I noticed that once again the maintainer/bugowner information is inconsistent: The content of the MAINTAINER file in git differs from the output of 'osc maintainer' or 'osc bugowner'. This leads to confusion.
We had this problem before and apparently fail to solve the inconsistency long term. So I propose to drop the MAINTAINER file in git and rely on osc.
Instead we can have a AUTHORS files so that people not knowing about osc can still reach the authors.
During a telco we reached following conclusion: - The buildservice is the offical source for maintainer information. - The MAINTAINER files will be changed to include a note: "use 'osc maintainer / bugowner <package-name>' to query the maintainer and bugowner" - Martin will commit a README that will also include notes how to reach developers. Martin, it would be cool if you could also update the MAINTAINER files during the README mass-commit. - The MAINTAINER files could be removed in the future when everybody has learn to use osc. ciao Arvin -- Arvin Schnell, <aschnell@suse.de> Senior Software Engineer, Research & Development SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, GF: Jeff Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg) Maxfeldstraße 5 90409 Nürnberg Germany -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org
Well, some time already passed and there is still some incorrect information in build service. I propose to reserve one day to fix all problems and to mass change MAINTAINER file ( I can do it ). Josef On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 17:40:16 +0100 Arvin Schnell <aschnell@suse.de> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 11:48:06AM +0100, Arvin Schnell wrote:
while reassigning yast-maintainers bugs I noticed that once again the maintainer/bugowner information is inconsistent: The content of the MAINTAINER file in git differs from the output of 'osc maintainer' or 'osc bugowner'. This leads to confusion.
We had this problem before and apparently fail to solve the inconsistency long term. So I propose to drop the MAINTAINER file in git and rely on osc.
Instead we can have a AUTHORS files so that people not knowing about osc can still reach the authors.
During a telco we reached following conclusion:
- The buildservice is the offical source for maintainer information.
- The MAINTAINER files will be changed to include a note: "use 'osc maintainer / bugowner <package-name>' to query the maintainer and bugowner"
- Martin will commit a README that will also include notes how to reach developers.
Martin, it would be cool if you could also update the MAINTAINER files during the README mass-commit.
- The MAINTAINER files could be removed in the future when everybody has learn to use osc.
ciao Arvin
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org
Hi today we faced it again. So if noone is against it, I will do migration of MAINTAINER file to obs/ibs tomorrow ( 18.9.2014 ). Plan is that I create one example pull request with change and it will be approved I will do it automatic in master branch. Josef On Fri, 4 Jul 2014 13:43:33 +0200 Josef Reidinger <jreidinger@suse.cz> wrote:
Well, some time already passed and there is still some incorrect information in build service. I propose to reserve one day to fix all problems and to mass change MAINTAINER file ( I can do it ).
Josef
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 17:40:16 +0100 Arvin Schnell <aschnell@suse.de> wrote:
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 11:48:06AM +0100, Arvin Schnell wrote:
while reassigning yast-maintainers bugs I noticed that once again the maintainer/bugowner information is inconsistent: The content of the MAINTAINER file in git differs from the output of 'osc maintainer' or 'osc bugowner'. This leads to confusion.
We had this problem before and apparently fail to solve the inconsistency long term. So I propose to drop the MAINTAINER file in git and rely on osc.
Instead we can have a AUTHORS files so that people not knowing about osc can still reach the authors.
During a telco we reached following conclusion:
- The buildservice is the offical source for maintainer information.
- The MAINTAINER files will be changed to include a note: "use 'osc maintainer / bugowner <package-name>' to query the maintainer and bugowner"
- Martin will commit a README that will also include notes how to reach developers.
Martin, it would be cool if you could also update the MAINTAINER files during the README mass-commit.
- The MAINTAINER files could be removed in the future when everybody has learn to use osc.
ciao Arvin
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org
On 17.9.2014 13:08, Josef Reidinger wrote:
Hi today we faced it again. So if noone is against it, I will do migration of MAINTAINER file to obs/ibs tomorrow ( 18.9.2014 ).
Plan is that I create one example pull request with change and it will be approved I will do it automatic in master branch.
Sounds good. Thanks in advance Lukas -- Lukas Ocilka, Systems Management (Yast) Team Leader Cloud & Systems Management Department, SUSE Linux -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org
On 17.9.2014 13:08, Josef Reidinger wrote:
Hi today we faced it again. So if noone is against it, I will do migration of MAINTAINER file to obs/ibs tomorrow ( 18.9.2014 ).
Plan is that I create one example pull request with change and it will be approved I will do it automatic in master branch.
Hi, It seems that SLE-1-GA has been changed inconsistently. y2autoconf in SLE-12-GA contains $MAINTAINER = `cat MAINTAINER`; https://github.com/yast/yast-devtools/blob/SLE-12-GA/build-tools/scripts/y2a... But MAINTAINER in, e.g., yast-installation already contains Deprecated file. Use `osc maintainer yast2-installation` instead. https://github.com/yast/yast-installation/blob/SLE-12-GA/MAINTAINER So, either we have some other build-tools in SLE-12 or some magic happens in our build service ;) Bye Lukas -- Lukas Ocilka, Systems Management (Yast) Team Leader Cloud & Systems Management Department, SUSE Linux -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: yast-devel+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: yast-devel+owner@opensuse.org
participants (6)
-
Arvin Schnell -
Josef Reidinger -
Ladislav Slezak -
Lukas Ocilka -
Michal Filka -
Vladimir Moravec