ACTION REQUIRED - Unstaged Ports being DEPRECATED on June 31st.

[Melvyn Sopacua]

Hi,

On Mon, 12 May 2014, John Marino wrote:

> On 5/12/2014 20:49, Melvyn Sopacua wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 12 May 2014, John Marino wrote:
>>
>>> I commit PR patches that are 6 to 18 months old fairly frequently.
>>> There is obviously a huge backlog but many PRs are processed daily.  The
>>> PRs that aren't getting processed quickly are "[NEW PORT]" PRs (and
>>> apparently anything mentioning fuse-fs for some reason).  A staging PR
>>> is going to jump the line; it has a higher priority.
>>>
>>> Why would you even entertain the idea that a staging PR will fall
>>> between the cracks?
>>
>> Perhaps the better question is: what are the factors that will make
>> committers shy away from a PR, even if it's summary contains stage? [1]
>> Maybe we (maintainers) can do better?
>>
>> [1]
>
> Heh, 54 out of 2000+ PRs isn't too bad. :)

Ok..2000 ports PR's open at given time on how many committers? Starting
to look like Kurt has the right idea here.

> I doubt most cases are people intentionally passing over an ugly PR.  I
> am sure it happens but staging is generally straightforward so the PR
> itself isn't going to scare someone off.

Well, mine (ports/188901) I can see why someone walks around it, cause
the patch is >1MB and needs to be downloaded. The bulk is of course the
giant plist introduced by staging (and we can blame Zend for a
file-intensive boilerplate heavy framework, but that's another topic).

However, I don't see a way to make it more attractive, which is why I
asked.

--
Melvyn