Currently the support for MATE in Gentoo is setting ridiculous. So far we have: - MATE 1.8.x in ::gentoo, - MATE 1.10.x in ::mate (supposedly official), - MATE 1.12.0 in ::gentoo-mate-112, - MATE 1.12.1 in ::mate-overlay. From user perspective, this is *absurd*. You pretty much end up guessing which overlay to use to get proper support for MATE, or maybe use all of them and hope there will be no conflicts. Please find a way to cooperate and get nice, fresh MATE ebuilds to ::gentoo. The Gentoo MATE project page [1] suggests it is seeking manpower. While they mention they want Gentoo developers, I'm pretty sure we could get external contributors in, possibly with help of pull requests and/or proxy-maintainers support team. What do you think? [1]:https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:MATE#Recruitment
I'll be happy to cooperate with any of the developers if they indicate * working * contacts so that each question did not have to wait for an answer for weeks. And I don`t plan to stop work in support of my overlay, I very like this DE and want to have ebuilds for lastest version. (In the nearest future refinement and processing -9999 ebuilds from ::mate)
I am more than open to contribute directly to gentoo. I have the time resources, and the needed knowledge. I would definitely be happy to cooperate with anyone on packaging mate for gentoo, and coordinating with the upstream. The current maintainer is very busy. I have talked with him several times in September, and he provided useful feedback. The official gentoo developer and maintainer NP-Hardass, has a very good reason why he has fallen behind on many of his gentoo projects. The reason is personal, and I will not reveal it here. I'd just mention here, that I have already been a few time in the gentoo-dev IRC channel in order to see if I can acquire more responsibilities and thus pushing my ebuilds directly to gentoo. Before publishing my own overlay, I even contacted alex, who back than had an online overlay called open-overlay. He didn't reply to my emails, or to the issues I created on github in order to try an communicate publicly. Can you please provide a link to the overlay providing mate-1.12.1. I intended to update my own overlay directly after coming back from the holidays.
OzTiram, maybe you can rename your overlay on something another? I don`t like it`s name. And we can work on it together.
@goodghost, I have no problem with renaming it. Before I go and choose another name, would you like to suggest one? We could go with mate-de-gentoo. Is this OK?
@OzTiram, are you aware if NP-Hardass would mind you contributing directly to ::gentoo? I don't think he would but you may know more than I do. He started as a proxy-maintainer too. What I'm thinking of is that you could -- instead of creating overlays -- fork ::gentoo and submit pull requests. We would help you get them good enough quality and merge them directly to ::gentoo.
(In reply to OzTiram from comment #4) > @goodghost, I have no problem with renaming it. Before I go and choose > another name, would you like to suggest one? > > We could go with mate-de-gentoo. Is this OK? Maybe then ask Michał Górny to delete my 'mate-overlay' from layman`s list and gave that name to your overlay?
(In reply to goodghost from comment #6) > (In reply to OzTiram from comment #4) > > @goodghost, I have no problem with renaming it. Before I go and choose > > another name, would you like to suggest one? > > > > We could go with mate-de-gentoo. Is this OK? > > Maybe then ask Michał Górny to delete my 'mate-overlay' from layman`s list > and gave that name to your overlay? I think the emphasis is on moving away from the overlay and getting them into the official tree which will attract more attention and review by the devs to ensure the quality.
Gokturk Yuksek, I'll be glad of such a possibility. What I have to do to get it?
@goodghost, this is fine with me. We can rename my overlay. I think you should ask Michael to erase your overlay. Also, I am currently in a vacation, and I am not able to fiddle too much with git using my Android phone. @Michael, I would be more than happy to submit pull requests. I also created a repository on github which mirrors NP-Hardass repo, exactly for that. The problem is that he is not able to review them. Or maybe he is, but lacks the time or will. He wouldn't oppose me directly becoimg a proxy maintained, as long as the quality Of the ebuilds is good. This also replies to @Goktruk. So to sum, My next actions will be the following: * Rename my overlay (this solves another problem which was reported with this overly) * Submit multiple pull requests to ::gentoo so that official maintainers will review the ebuilds. This scheme will allow quick users to continue using the overlay, and we'll also push the changes to upstream and allow people who don't want to use the fast moving overlay to use more modern mate ebuilds.
Michał Górny, we have reached agreement on the beginning of joint work, so my overlay 'mate-overlay' can be removed from layman`s list
@Michael, While removing the overlay from goodghost, can you please also rename my overlay? I have changed the repository name to mate-de-gentoo.
mgorny is also overwhelmed by multiple projects. while the overlay situation is pending resolution let's focus on the pull requests to ::gentoo. Sadly, I'm an xfce4 user but I don't mind reviewing and runtesting if it helps the current state of things. MATE 1.8 series don't have too many open bugs, mostly compilation failures and missing deps. I can work on 548536, 561778, 528380, 567468, 533230 which are all 1.8 bugs. Looks like NP did plenty of work for the 1.10 series in the official overlay. The tracker bug for the bump is bug 551588. Bug 561408 also has plenty of contributed ebuilds. The *unofficial* overlays have 1.12 series. Bug 567702 is the bump request for 1.12. What do you folks want to do? Try to move 1.10 series into the tree and develop 1.12 in the overlay?
And done!
