Re: git: ab5f2419c25e - main - x11/xwayland-run: Add new port

Emmanuel Vadot <manu@bidouilliste.com> writes:

> On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 18:20:44 +0200
> Jan Beich <jbeich@FreeBSD.org> wrote:
>
>> Emmanuel Vadot <manu@FreeBSD.org> writes:
>> 
>> > +MAINTAINER=	x11@FreeBSD.org
>> > +COMMENT=	Run Xwayland and compositor headless
>> > +WWW=		https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/ofourdan/xwayland-run
>> 
>> Did you dump this on x11@ and run away from updates[1] and bugs[2]?
>
>  I "dumped" this on x11@ because I don't really believe in individual
> maintainership.

Interesting. I have the opposite experience. Either individuals have
free time or transfer maintainership (willingfully or by policy).

>  I didn't addressed the bugs and updates as I have other things more
> important to do.

At least bug 275430 was filed 3 hours after you've landed the port.
It's a bit strange to run out of free time so quickly and not find
the time again for 5 months.

I find your port sloppy and upstream project overhyped. xwayland-run (GPLv2)
looks like a reimplementation of Xweston (MIT). While xwayland-run
provides xwfb-run and wlheadless-run useful for CI, those are currently
partially broken in FreeBSD package. Cage is also not a good choice
for rootful Xwayland with X11 WM/DE due to lack of IPC or Wayland
protocol to turn off screen on idle or similar.

Do you actually dogfood xwayland-run to justify the statu quo?

>> Maybe reassign directly to yourself as x11@ has plenty of ports[3]
>> requiring attention.
>
>  As said before x11@ is only me (mostly), so :
>
>  1/ That would change a thing

Focus where help is needed. How important xwayland-run is compared to
other x11@ ports? Is it part of X.org, Mesa, official Wayland distribution
or critical for those?

>  2/ If you have time to waste writing this email you probably have time
> to do some of the updates that x11@ ports needs.

Fair point. I find bugzilla/phabricator workflow has too much overhead
for lots of trivial changes across many ports. It's OK for complex
changes but those are rare in ports/, except when adding new ports.

>  3/ I've invited you again to be x11@ the other day but I guess it's
> easier for you to not work with us (me) and instead complain about us
> (me)

Downscale, split or allow granular co-maintainership. I can only provide
quality over a limited number of ports e.g., meson for desktop@, icu for
office@, ffmpeg for multimedia@. And there're plenty of my own ports:

  $ rg -lg Makefile\* MAINT.\*jbeich@ | wc -l
       268
  $ rg -lg Makefile\* MAINT.\*x11@ | wc -l
       262