Preliminary list: sci-electronics: 34 (electronics?) calchan, chrb?, agriffis?, phosphan, ribosome, plasmaroo, hansmi, cryos?, gustavoz? Denis Dupeyron <calchan@gentoo.org> and Tim Yamin <plasmaroo@gentoo.org> have expressed interest already. George
I had a short talk with George on irc, and the conclusion is that it's about time we get moving. So, here's what needs to be done : 1. Decide on a herd name It was suggested that we drop 'sci-' from the category name for the herd name. In our case that means we call our herd 'electronics'. Any objections ? As far as I'm concerned, I like it. 2. Create an entry in herds.xml and add maintainers If everybody agrees, I will do this. I will add as maintainers only devs who ask for it (on this bug for example). 3. Adjust metadata.xml in corresponding ebuilds Again, I'm offering to do this, unless somebody disagrees or wants to help me. 4. Create an alias (electronics@gentoo.org, or see 1.) and make it point to maintainers I can do that too. Same as in 2., I won't add you unless you ask me too. Anything else I'm forgetting ? I'd like to start doing this over the week-end since I have much less time on weekdays, but I also would like to read your opinions before. So, please try and reply before tomorrow (july 2nd) 9:00 UTC, when I will probably start. I'd definitely like to hear Tim (plasmaroo) about this, but others are most welcome. Denis.
(In reply to comment #1) > 1. Decide on a herd name > It was suggested that we drop 'sci-' from the category name for the herd name. > In our case that means we call our herd 'electronics'. Any objections ? As far > as I'm concerned, I like it. With the sci- is probably less confusing for wranglers since the category has a sci-. Otherwise they have yet another thing to remember :)... so I'm sort of not too in favour of the just electronics@. Thanks for offering your help with 2., 3. and 4 :-)
> > 1. Decide on a herd name > > It was suggested that we drop 'sci-' from the category name for the herd name. > With the sci- is probably less confusing for wranglers since the category has a > sci-. Otherwise they have yet another thing to remember :)... so I'm sort of Eh, you know what? I sort of suggested that we might drop sci from herd names, but then just now, on a short walk I just had, I was pondering - how to easily search for all the relevant herds or other related info? Even in herds.xml file that may be non-trivial.. So I am kind of turning around on that thought :). May be we should indeed keep (or even force) sci- in herd names? But right now I would rather leave it at the discretion of maintainers who will deal with stuff most directly.. George
(In reply to comment #2) > With the sci- is probably less confusing for wranglers since the category has a > sci-. Otherwise they have yet another thing to remember :)... so I'm sort of Good point. (In reply to comment #3) > but then just now, on a short walk I just had, I was pondering - how to easily > search for all the relevant herds or other related info? Even in herds.xml file > that may be non-trivial.. So I am kind of turning around on that thought :). Good point, again. It seems keeping sci- makes a lot of sense. So it eventually gets my vote too. Denis.
(In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > > but then just now, on a short walk I just had, I was pondering - how to easily > > search for all the relevant herds or other related info? Even in herds.xml file > > that may be non-trivial.. So I am kind of turning around on that thought :). > > Good point, again. That's what metadata.xml is for. Whether you have to type sci-$foo or just $foo, the difference is meaningless so I say pick whichever one you like for some other reason.
I have done everything up to item 3 above, and opened an infra bug for item number 4 (blocking this bug here). While I was editing all those metadata.xml files, I have added longdescription entries where they were missing or useless, i.e. 90% of the packages. I have found the following packages in sci-libs that look like they need to be maintained by sci-electronics : sci-libs/libgdgeda sci-libs/libgeda Do you guys agree ? Have you seen others ? Denis.
(In reply to comment #6) > I have found the following packages in sci-libs that look like they need to be > maintained by sci-electronics : > sci-libs/libgdgeda > sci-libs/libgeda Yeah, those are ours. I've just had a look and I haven't seen any others.
Please welcome the sci-electronics herd as it has officially started its existence a few minutes ago. :o) Denis.
