| 1 |
On Friday, December 9, 2016 3:24:44 PM EST james wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 12/08/2016 02:15 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > Even if I'm repeating myself... Please keep the mailing lists on topic. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Problems caused by gentoo developer behaviors, are "on topic" for this |
| 8 |
> list. Your position only serves to obfuscate remedies. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Be careful, let what happened to me on -project stand as a warning. Short of |
| 11 |
this reply I am mostly radio silent, no posts, no bugs, no irc, nada... I was |
| 12 |
encouraged for such. Most do not care about the big picture, just their neck |
| 13 |
of the woods. Your posts make mine seem abridged :) |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
A few select comments, as most rather not hear from me entirely. I will focus |
| 16 |
on technical ones. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> Technologies |
| 19 |
> like Java, could easily be supported should they choose to allow |
| 20 |
> non-sources into the ebuild process, for their gentoo-forked-distro. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
This is already taking place in Gentoo. There is not the man power, time, or |
| 23 |
experience for larger Java applications to be packaged. They are going into |
| 24 |
tree as binaries. Most without even unbundling deps that are packaged in tree. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> This enables (by active promotion) any individual, corporation or |
| 27 |
> business to benefit from a deployment of gentoo or a customized version |
| 28 |
> of gentoo, just like a privileged few corporations have benefited |
| 29 |
> (google, CoreOS etc). Without many companies at least testing and some |
| 30 |
> using gentoo, Gentoo is mostly a fiefdom of certain companies. This is |
| 31 |
> evidenced by the history of devs that work at these companies and have |
| 32 |
> been or currently are gentoo devs. It's back-channel control, evidenced |
| 33 |
> by irc and other venues where only certain folks can listen. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
This is the down side of letting everyone work on something that pertains to |
| 36 |
them. Without any sort of over all leadership, a common goal or direction from |
| 37 |
the Council. I am not sure Gentoo has had such leadership since the Chief |
| 38 |
Architect position was eliminated. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
It is one thing for a developer to work in an area, scratch their itch. But as |
| 41 |
companies hire developers. Those companies can start to take things in their |
| 42 |
own direction. Largely this has not been a problem, but it lets outside |
| 43 |
companies indirectly control the direction of Gentoo. If a conflict between |
| 44 |
companies arises, it could get interesting. Thankfully not an issue and may |
| 45 |
never become one. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
> WHY (3):: Update the exam every (2) years and require all devs take the |
| 48 |
> exam to re-qualify. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Interesting comment as someone who has done the quizzes several times. Most |
| 51 |
developers do them once and never again. I wonder how many would pass a quiz |
| 52 |
if they were retested.... |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
Also something many here are likely not aware. To become a Gentoo Java |
| 55 |
Developer, there are 3 quizzes. There is a 3rd Gentoo Java Quiz. I am not |
| 56 |
aware of any other quizzes for other parts of the tree. Which in part goes to |
| 57 |
show some of the complexities with Java. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
Though it may be beneficial if others come up with their own quizzes, which |
| 60 |
could be small. There are some nuances to packaging other languages. Not sure |
| 61 |
if as many as Java to require another quiz, but may help for others joining |
| 62 |
teams for other languages. |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Java/Developer_Quiz |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
-- |
| 67 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
Archives