From owner-freebsd-eclipse@FreeBSD.ORG Sun Apr 20 07:30:37 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: eclipse@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CB9D81E8; Sun, 20 Apr 2014 07:30:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from shepard.synsport.net (mail.synsport.com [208.69.230.148]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A227813D1; Sun, 20 Apr 2014 07:30:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.0.20] (unknown [130.255.19.191]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by shepard.synsport.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3021438EB; Sun, 20 Apr 2014 02:30:14 -0500 (CDT) Message-ID: <53537775.5080607@marino.st> Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2014 09:29:57 +0200 From: John Marino User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "ports-committers@freebsd.org" , eclipse@freebsd.org Subject: Time to dissolve eclipse@ team? Others want to maintain / team concept in general X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: FreeBSD Ports Management Team X-BeenThere: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list Reply-To: marino@freebsd.org List-Id: "FreeBSD users of eclipse EDI, tools, rich client apps & ports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2014 07:30:37 -0000 For several months while scanning our numerous PRs, I've noticed people complaining Eclipse was woefully out of 9 month ago. There have been several PRs and they aren't even getting answered. I see a new one on 15 April, requesting maintainership also with offering patches to update to the latest version. As I understand it, the eclipse@ team is down to a single person, and I don't think the team concept should be used with less than 3 people. What's I'd like to see happen: 1) Portmgr establish minimum requirements for a "team". Nobody is going to touch a PR owned by a team, even if it has timed out for months. I recommend that a team must consist of at least 3 people, and if this requirement cannot be maintained then the team must be dissolved. 2) the eclipse team should be dissolved unless more people join it immediately. The ports owned by eclipse should be reassigned to either the current member of eclipse or ports@ 3) seriously consider given eclipse maintainership to Jimmy Kelly if the current maintainers don't have enough time anymore. Eclipse is an important set of ports and having such an old version doesn't look for ports, so it could be a Public Relations issue as well. All that said, maybe the eclipse@ team has plans, but they certainly haven't been communicated. None of the last 5 PRs going back July 2013 have been responded to. Thanks, John