Time to dissolve eclipse@ team? Others want to maintain / team concept in general

[Ronald Klop]

On Sun, 20 Apr 2014 09:29:57 +0200, John Marino  
<freebsd.contact at marino.st> wrote:

> 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


At least reward people who make a PR with a patch for a new version of  
Eclipse with a port. People who actually do the work are the ones who make  
open source work.

Just make an eclipse43 port. I understand there is a  
eclipse-plugin-framework which must work with the eclipse port, but more  
exposure to new ports besides a patch on the mailinglist would be great.

Regards,
Ronald.