search

ScoopInstaller / Scoop

A command-line installer for Windows.
https://scoop.sh
Other
21.22k stars 1.41k forks source link

Does this project need more maintainers? #4456

Closed akirayamamoto closed 2 years ago

akirayamamoto commented 3 years ago

I am seeing more and more forks of this project. It's good that this project is open source so whoever feels like can fork it. However, that just spreads the energy all over and will tend to weaken this project which was the main one.

So, are you accepting more contributors?

dwettstein commented 3 years ago

To me, this project has the same problems as discussed in https://github.com/ScoopInstaller/Main/issues/2403. Additionally, no one is able or willing to add more maintainers.

Some of the very important missing features were already implemented by @Ash258 in his fork https://github.com/Ash258/Scoop-Core.

EDIT: See also my comment here https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop/issues/2609#issuecomment-803298247

sskras commented 3 years ago

@dwettstein, thanks for the info. Is the owner of this repo available/alive?

silverkorn commented 3 years ago

I've also suggested his personal fork, which support the long awaiting zstd decompression, where official MSYS2 GCC is now more and more requiring it. But it wasn't too much welcomed by himself... One of the biggest maintainer of the main scoop itself. 😅 I tried to keep it only where applicable/necessary...

Not sure to know what's happening with the maintenance of scoop but it sure needs a little more love... I used to praised on it but now I'm getting a bit concerned. :confused:

cprieto commented 3 years ago

It is funny because I actually did the same question (do you need more maintainers?) months ago and "our favourite rude maintainer" answer with a simple "No, we are fine, thanks".

It breaks my heart how this amazing project is dying, I mean, it is common now to see broken packages and wait months for the package to be fixed, I wish there could be anything we can do but in my case I got a little tired of rude people who doesn't need help.

😞

Valinor commented 3 years ago

It is funny because I actually did the same question (do you need more maintainers?) months ago and "our favourite rude maintainer" answer with a simple "No, we are fine, thanks". Same here ;). It's sad

It breaks my heart how this amazing project is dying, I mean, it is common now to see broken packages and wait months for the package to be fixed, I wish there could be anything we can do but in my case I got a little tired of rude people who doesn't need help.

I am in the same case. I began to help with the main bucket, but things like this ( github.com/ScoopInstaller/Main/pull/2741 ) do not encourage involvement.

The https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop/graphs/contributors show us informations about the life and death of this project.

deevus commented 3 years ago

Hey everyone. I'm one of the original maintainers, and although I'm not active anymore (https://github.com/ScoopInstaller/Main/issues/2403#issuecomment-947185550) I'm willing to help where I can so that the project can live on.

akirayamamoto commented 3 years ago

@deevus do you have permission to add maintainers to this repo?

deevus commented 3 years ago

@deevus do you have permission to add maintainers to this repo?

I do. I'm not active in the community at the moment so I'm not a good judge of whether someone is fit to be a maintainer. However I've upgraded @rasa so he can add maintainers.

silverkorn commented 3 years ago

It is funny because I actually did the same question (do you need more maintainers?) months ago and "our favourite rude maintainer" answer with a simple "No, we are fine, thanks". Same here ;). It's sad

It breaks my heart how this amazing project is dying, I mean, it is common now to see broken packages and wait months for the package to be fixed, I wish there could be anything we can do but in my case I got a little tired of rude people who doesn't need help.

I am in the same case. I began to help with the main bucket, but things like this ( github.com/ScoopInstaller/Main/pull/2741 ) do not encourage involvement.

The https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop/graphs/contributors show us informations about the life and death of this project.

I hope it's not the case here, or if so, that it would hopefully be fixed with new maintainers, but there used to be some situation in a previous team where one of the members was starting to affect the whole team in a negative way due to his continuously unexpected behaviours... This lead to team members searching seriously for other places to work even if they thought the projects themselves there were still stimulating.

rashil2000 commented 3 years ago

I resonate wholeheartedly with what @silverkorn said. I'm glad that the Main bucket finally has some active maintainers who are willing to politely review and discuss issues and PRs without feeling condescended. Hopefully we can get the same momentum here on the scoop core, and get some high priority stuff (like zst decompression) worked out ✌

rashil2000 commented 3 years ago

@rasa @deevus I've been meaning to ask this for a while, and since you're the owners, would it make sense to move this repo (lukesampson/scoop) and lukesampson/scoop-extras to the @ScoopInstaller org?

As far as I'm aware, GitHub resolves transferred links automatically, so people using the old links won't face any problems.

rasa commented 3 years ago

... Would it make sense to move this repo (lukesampson/scoop) and lukesampson/scoop-extras to the @ScoopInstaller org?

It's a great idea, and I would support that move, but that's really up to Luke. I don't think he's been asked before, but I could be wrong.

rashil2000 commented 3 years ago

In that case, summoning @lukesampson for his opinion... :)

cprieto commented 3 years ago

I resonate wholeheartedly with what @silverkorn said. I'm glad that the Main bucket finally has some active maintainers who are willing to politely review and discuss issues and PRs without feeling condescended. Hopefully we can get the same momentum here on the scoop core, and get some high priority stuff (like zst decompression) worked out ✌

Yay! that is awesome, I stopped doing PRs in the main bucket because it was not fun to get a message about how dumb you were for pushing that or discovering your PR was merged with someone else name instead of the original contributor.

silverkorn commented 3 years ago

According to the licensing of Scoop, it would be permitted, but indeed with good sense and respect, let's confirm with him. The only fear I might have is the risk of a lack of response from him according to his latest activity. So 🤞

silverkorn commented 3 years ago

By the way, I'm no expert in English but shouldn't the title of this issue be more like "Does this project need more maintainers?" instead?

lukesampson commented 3 years ago

Yes I'm fine with moving this repo to the org. Thanks guys.

rashil2000 commented 3 years ago

That's awesome news!

Since the discussion was about both this repository and scoop-extras, I have opened the corresponding issue at lukesampson/scoop-extras#7064

rasa commented 3 years ago

Yes I'm fine with moving this repo to the org. Thanks guys.

@lukesampson That's great. GitHub should forward (301) the old address to the new address, so the move should be seamless.

Do you have any thoughts on moving the scoop extras repo too? That was suggested as well, and will allow us to easily assign maintainers to all things scoop related.

And many thanks for your years of creating and supporting scoop.

rashil2000 commented 3 years ago

According to this issue #3437, looks like the transfer was planned but it didn't happen somehow.

@rasa, could you initiate transfer for this repository, while we wait for @lukesampson's approval for scoop-extras repository?

Also, it would be good to pin this issue.

rasa commented 3 years ago

@rasa, could you initiate transfer for this repository, while we wait for @lukesampson's approval for scoop-extras repository?

I don't appear able to, as I don't see a "Settings" tab. My guess is @lukesampson needs to make this happen. Once he does so, I will make fixing anything that breaks a top priority.

lukesampson commented 3 years ago

Hi guys. I've initiated the transfer of scoop and scoop-extras to the ScoopInstaller org. Please let me know if there's anything else I need to do. Thanks.

rashil2000 commented 3 years ago

That's awesome news!

It'd look more elegant if the repos were renamed to Scoop and Extras respectively.

Personally, if the two repos are willing to accept more maintainers, I'll be glad to volunteer :)

rasa commented 3 years ago

OK, I renamed scoop-extras to Extras. I also pinned it and scoop to https://github.com/ScoopInstaller (and removed scoop.sh, as github only allows 6 pins). I also updated the extras url, and replaced lukesampson with ScoopInstaller in several places in https://github.com/ScoopInstaller/scoop. I made these changes to master, so these should be merged into develop at some point.

I didn't rename scoop repo to Scoop, as I don't know what the ramifications of that are. I'm not against the change, I just don't want to break things any more than necessary.

rasa commented 3 years ago

@rashil2000 You are already in the @ScoopInstaller/Maintainer team, so you should already have the ability to update Extras and scoop.

rashil2000 commented 3 years ago

@rasa The @ScoopInstaller/maintainer team has access to only these 6 repositories - https://github.com/orgs/ScoopInstaller/teams/maintainers/repositories

image

I think you'll need to add the newly transferred repositories to this team.

(A simple test I did to see if had access in Extras - check if I have the ability to modify Labels in an Issue/PR. I don't seem to be able to.)

niheaven commented 3 years ago

If @rasa is activated and has rights to submit to this repo, I'll keep moving on refactoring the scoop infrastructure 😄. The develop branch is far more outdated...

dsbert commented 3 years ago

@rasa, @deevus, and everyone else,

This is great news! I had given up hope and thought that contributing was pointless with the state scoop was in. Thank you for your efforts keeping these projects alive.

rasa commented 3 years ago

The @ScoopInstaller/maintainer team has access to only these 6 repositories -

@rashil2000 OK, I added all the repos to the Maintainers team. I also created a "Writers" team, and a "Triage" team, for all the repos. Those teams are currently unused. I also added Discussions to the scoop and Extras repos.

rashil2000 commented 3 years ago

Thank you @rasa :)

Unrelated question: what's ScoopInstaller/scoop.sh repository for? I mean it was forked but I don't see any changes in it (all branches are still in-sync with upstream).

rasa commented 3 years ago

Unrelated question: what's ScoopInstaller/scoop.sh repository for? I mean it was forked but I don't see any changes in it (all branches are still in-sync with upstream).

I'm not sure. Perhaps it was to pin it at the top of the page. My preference would be to delete it, but I didn't fork it, so I don't want to step on anyone's toes.

kriswilk commented 3 years ago

I didn't rename scoop repo to Scoop, as I don't know what the ramifications of that are. I'm not against the change, I just don't want to break things any more than necessary.

I much appreciate this cautious approach but hope that it gets reviewed in due time. My OCD will shower you will a thousand thanks if/when it is renamed 😊

rasa commented 3 years ago

Or we can just rename it and see what breaks, say in a few days?

It will probably work as https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop will 301 to https://github.com/ScoopInstaller/scoop which will then 301 to https://github.com/ScoopInstaller/Scoop.

deevus commented 3 years ago

Or we can just rename it and see what breaks, say in a few days?

It will probably work as https://github.com/lukesampson/scoop will 301 to https://github.com/ScoopInstaller/scoop which will then 301 to https://github.com/ScoopInstaller/Scoop.

Links aren't usually case sensitive so in terms of issues there may be none at all.

rashil2000 commented 3 years ago

Links aren't usually case sensitive so in terms of issues there may be none at all.

I have observed this too. github.com/AbCdEf automatically gets redirected to github.com/abcdef if the username is abcdef

rasa commented 3 years ago

I just changed it to Scoop. Crossin' our fingers...

stevehipwell commented 3 years ago

Unrelated question: what's ScoopInstaller/scoop.sh repository for? I mean it was forked but I don't see any changes in it (all branches are still in-sync with upstream).

Isn't ScoopInstaller/scoop.sh the website repo?

rashil2000 commented 3 years ago

Unrelated question: what's ScoopInstaller/scoop.sh repository for? I mean it was forked but I don't see any changes in it (all branches are still in-sync with upstream).

Isn't ScoopInstaller/scoop.sh the website repo?

No, the website is being served from the gh-pages branch of ScoopInstaller/Scoop itself.

stevehipwell commented 3 years ago

No, the website is being served from the gh-pages branch of ScoopInstaller/Scoop itself.

Was it previously the website?

rashil2000 commented 3 years ago

Was it previously the website?

I don't think so. It was probably forked to revamp the website to add documentation and search functionality, but no commit was ever made.

chawyehsu commented 3 years ago

Isn't ScoopInstaller/scoop.sh the website repo?

That was a WIP remake of the Scoop Wiki by an user, being forked to this org. It's not affiliated to the org and the fork can be deleted safely.

Meanwhile, @rasa since you have the administrator rights, could you please enable the branch protection rule of Requiring a pull request before merging, and at least 2 member approvals (was 1 for the main bucket repo) for all writable repos? Although I'm not active in the community, this will force PR reviews that can prevent most commit/merge mistakes.

rashil2000 commented 3 years ago

@rasa could you also please prioritize https://github.com/ScoopInstaller/Extras/pull/7095?

Many pull requests are becoming active again in Extras but the new maintainers can't even run /verify to trigger manifest checking. Also, there's no CI running there too.

I might be overstepping here, but would it be a good idea to extend ownership rights to some more members (perhaps to @niheaven or @issaclin32)? Currently, 3 of the 4 owners are inactive and it puts too much workload on one person.

rasa commented 3 years ago

@deevus @lukesampson @r15ch13 Is anyone opposed to adding @niheaven or @issaclin32 as owners? They have both provided years of service to scoop. I could use the help.

rasa commented 3 years ago

Meanwhile, @rasa since you have the administrator rights, could you please enable the branch protection rule of Requiring a pull request before merging, and at least 2 member approvals (was 1 for the main bucket repo) for all writable repos? Although I'm not active in the community, this will force PR reviews that can prevent most commit/merge mistakes.

@chawyehsu I did this for the master and develop branches in the Scoop repo. If we enable that for bucket repos, won't the auto-updates from Excavator stop working?

chawyehsu commented 3 years ago

If we enable that for bucket repos, won't the auto-updates from Excavator stop working?

@rasa It will for Scoop-GitHubActions bots, but won't for r15ch13's Excavator because it has the same admin owner role as r15ch13. Check out the Main and Versions buckets, the branch protection rule was enabled for these repos, and Excavator can still commit updates.

rasa commented 3 years ago

@chawyehsu OK, I will implement this soon

rasa commented 3 years ago

@niheaven and @issaclin32 are now owners.

rasa commented 3 years ago

Isn't ScoopInstaller/scoop.sh the website repo?

That was a WIP remake of the Scoop Wiki by an user, being forked to this org. It's not affiliated to the org and the fork can be deleted safely.

could you please enable the branch protection rule of Requiring a pull request before merging, and at least 2 member approvals (was 1 for the main bucket repo) for all writable repos?

@chawyehsu OK, I set up our bucket repos to have branch protected but only with 1 member approval (for now). I left it as 1 for bucket repos as that is what it was previously for the Main bucket. If we see commit/merge mistakes slip through, we can bump this up to 2. The Scoop repo requires 2 approvals, but I removed the branch protection for the develop branch, as that didn't make sense.