From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [80.91.229.2] (helo=ciao.gmane.org) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Jvqy4-000388-0G for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Tue, 13 May 2008 11:38:44 +0200 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Jvqwj-0005Cr-Bh for openembedded-devel@openembedded.org; Tue, 13 May 2008 09:37:21 +0000 Received: from ip-62-143-23-251.hsi.ish.de ([62.143.23.251]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 13 May 2008 09:37:21 +0000 Received: from no2spam by ip-62-143-23-251.hsi.ish.de with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Tue, 13 May 2008 09:37:21 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: openembedded-devel@openembedded.org From: Rolf Leggewie Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 11:37:05 +0200 Message-ID: References: <4826A3B9.3050103@balister.org> <1210577770.4981.13.camel@dax.rpnet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip-62-143-23-251.hsi.ish.de User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.14 (X11/20080505) In-Reply-To: <1210577770.4981.13.camel@dax.rpnet.com> Sender: news Subject: Re: RFC: reverse the name change for org.oe.stable X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.10b4 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 09:38:44 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Richard Purdie wrote: > We do need a stable branch. I guess so. And I don't question that. I just raise the flag that if nobody is indeed interested in actually fixing bugs, we should reconsider having it. Right now, we have a snapshot with virtually no activity, not a stable, actively maintained branch. IMNSHO, OE should be honest or it will loose credibility. If we can't support a stable branch (because supposedly people are too busy), we should not be suggesting we do. The openembedded-stable ml and the bug tracker, together with the many people here who say "We should have a stable branch, *but* right now I can't work on it" tell a clear story. > The stable branch people have commented on the use of the bugzilla and I > can't really see a problem there. They say they want mail, fine. The problem is that they both block mail from bugzilla to the oe-stbale list (and I am not going to play human gateway) and ignoring it in the case of koen (who I added specifically as cc for bp flags raised). I don't think I should even be doing this. If people are supporting stable as the claim stands, there should be at least some activity in the bug tracker wrt fixing bugs. * several weeks if not months of no bug triaging from .stable causes concern * no activity after some bug triaging is done for them causes real concern * still no activity after blocking their meta bugs about a month ago causes serious concern * still no activity after sending several reminder mails to the ml causes grave concern * a "do as you please"-attitude after issuing a last warning and still no activity after providing them the patches the stable guys should have derived themselves if claims of support are to be taken serious this falls back on OE BTW, still no bug triaging and not even the simple activity of looking through the bugs that have been meticulously prepared. > technical rather than emotive and discuss the problems before proposing > inflammatory solutions. I am absolutely technical. The choice is simple a) support it, including at least some work in the bug tracker b) rename it c) risk loss of reputation for OE as not living up to claims made It is one of the three and really that easy. Unfortunately, it looks like everybody choosing c) because "we want stable".