[arch-dev-public] Dropping lots of packages

Aaron Griffin aaronmgriffin at gmail.com
Thu Jun 19 18:33:13 EDT 2008

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 5:19 PM, Simo Leone <simo at archlinux.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 01:27:40PM -0500, Aaron Griffin wrote:
>> Sooo... without mincing words here, what role is it that you want to
>> play? I keep having to deal with some of the administrava that I
>> thought you were in charge of (new TUs, forum passwords, etc etc), I
>> was hoping we'd have a new ISO release by the time I got my internet
>> back at home, and I had to bring on 2 people with AUR commit access
>> because the patch queue was getting too long.
> Without getting too defensive here, I'm well aware that I've added to
> your admin workload which is already enormous, but I can only think of
> a few times offhand. Either way, I apologize. As for the ISO release
> and the AUR, all I can really say is what I said in my status reply,
> my motivation with regard to Arch took a nose dive. A worthwhile
> suggestion which I hope you consider would be to have at least two
> people working on projects at all times, in case one suddenly loses
> interest. Having multiple people working on things may even be a
> preventative measure against loss of interest, and serves as a sanity
> check to reduce bad code and bad decisions as well. I'm aware that you
> have 40ish developer applications in your inbox, it's not very aparent
> to me why we don't already have multiple people on each project.

That's not the point. The point is that work was promised and not
done. If you're not going to do something then just say "no" so I can
find someone else. It's a matter of communication and trust here. If
you don't want to complete any of these projects, that's fine - just
let me know.

With you dropping package maintenance duties and AUR duties, I am
honestly wondering what you're working on. It's not a jab at you, I
seriously don't know what you'll be doing.

>> So, could you, at the very least, push your ISO related changes to
>> gerolde so that someone (most likely me) else can pick up where you
>> left off.
> Sure no problem. Believe it or not I recently (like within the last
> couple days) got back on this one, so you can expect to see some pushes
> soon. We all know it's bad to develop solo in the dark, so if I had
> something to push I would have pushed it already. Fact is, I haven't
> really been working on it until super recently.

The gitweb tells a different story besides the "solo in the dark" one:

Looks like Dan did some work too. We also had tons of feedback and
tons of people testing.

Developing "solo in the dark" is something we're all doing - I did it
with the DB scripts, Eliott did it with the archweb code, Dan probably
does it alot with pacman too... it just happens. The simple fact
remains that if you're not going to do something, and told someone you
would do it, then there's a conflict there. In the future, please let
me (or all of us) know that you're not going to do it.

>> And please let me know what role you are actually thinking of taking
>> on here, because I can't seem to figure it out.
> Makes two of us. I was kind of thinking of keeping with what I've
> already been doing, which is sort of a jack of all trades with a focus
> on the web admin and liveCD stuff. Although now that Eliott is gone (for
> reasons which remain a mystery to all of us, maybe lack of tacos?), I'm
> the only one in charge of the web admin-ey stuff once again, which as I
> said earlier, is a bad thing.

Well, with Dusty being brought on for django duties, he is also in the
web group and has access to most of this stuff. I'm sure he could
handle some of the admin-y stuff on that side. Regardless though, the
web admin stuff isn't all that much - we haven't upgraded
punbb/mediawiki/flyspray in ages.

More information about the arch-dev-public mailing list