From owner-freebsd-eclipse@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Apr 20 17:14:07 2014
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-eclipse@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: eclipse@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 14639BFB;
 Sun, 20 Apr 2014 17:14:07 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail.soaustin.net (pancho.soaustin.net [76.74.250.40])
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E695D1186;
 Sun, 20 Apr 2014 17:14:06 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail.soaustin.net (Postfix, from userid 502)
 id EB9CB5607C; Sun, 20 Apr 2014 12:14:05 -0500 (CDT)
Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2014 12:14:05 -0500
From: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com>
To: marino@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Time to dissolve eclipse@ team?  Others want to maintain / team
 concept in general
Message-ID: <20140420171405.GA6763@lonesome.com>
References: <53537775.5080607@marino.st>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <53537775.5080607@marino.st>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Cc: eclipse@freebsd.org, FreeBSD Ports Management Team <portmgr@freebsd.org>,
 "ports-committers@freebsd.org" <ports-committers@freebsd.org>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "FreeBSD users of eclipse EDI, tools, rich client apps &amp;
 ports." <freebsd-eclipse.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-eclipse>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-eclipse-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-eclipse/>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-eclipse@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-eclipse-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-eclipse>,
 <mailto:freebsd-eclipse-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 20 Apr 2014 17:14:07 -0000

On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 09:29:57AM +0200, John Marino wrote:
> 1) 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.

I'm not so sure about this part, but ...
> Nobody is going to touch a PR owned by a team, even if it has timed
> out for months.

... this absolutely has to change.  Evidence below.

To save folks browser time, I've summarized the over 2000 (!) ports
PRs in http://portsmon.freebsd.org/portsprsall.py?sortby=responsible ,
focusing on mailing-list based maintainers.

*note*: I am not blaming anyone on any team for the accumulation.
Like most ports work, PR busting is thankless.

apache               9
autotools            3
chromium             4
doceng              10
freebsd-arm          2
freebsd-eclipse      4
freebsd-emulation   10
freebsd-java        20
freebsd-multimedia  34
freebsd-python      36
freebsd-x11         56
freebsd-xfce        10
gecko               32
gnome              100
haskell              5
kde                 32
lua                  4
mono                 3
office              44
perl                17
pgsql                6
ruby                 1
vbox                18

And now my own conclusions.  Yours may vary.

 - Pretty much every team needs new blood.

 - The UI-based things tend to have a larger number of PRs than
   non-UI-based things.  This is probably to be expected -- there's
   simply more ways to get things wrong.

 - The eclipse PRs are indeed stale -- but they're not the stalest.

 - The doceng (often ghostscript) PRs are rarely answered.

 - The multimedia, mono, and office PRs are rarely answered.

 - The multimedia PRs are mostly about multimedia/vlc.

 - The office PRs are often about build failures.

 - The gnome, kde, and x11 PR counts are somewhat mitigated by the
   fact that a great deal of integration and testing happens outside
   the ports tree, and tend to be introduced all at once.

 - Assigning new-port PRs to mailing lists is counterproductive.

mcl