| 1 |
I feel your pain. Usually it takes several weeks before the ebuild |
| 2 |
updates I submit get accepted, and if at all, they usually they get |
| 3 |
accepted unaltered, which makes those weeks a waste of time. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
I wish stuff could get into the unstable branch of Gentoo much easier. I |
| 6 |
would like to see some people with freedom to roam the tree accept |
| 7 |
things into unstable, and not have everything depend on if a branch |
| 8 |
maintainer has time or interest currently or not. Gentoo is supposed to |
| 9 |
be bleeding edge, but fact is that 30-35% of the packages in portage |
| 10 |
tree are at least one version behind. A too large share of developer |
| 11 |
resources external to the official gentoo developer team remains largely |
| 12 |
unused. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
A distribution that prides itself by being flexible and bleeding edge |
| 15 |
should also have smooth and flexible policies. For insight into where |
| 16 |
bureaucratic policies brings a distribution refer to Debian. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
A few people are undoubtedly going to take offence at this, but my main |
| 19 |
point is that gentoo needs to accept contributions from outside easier. |
| 20 |
There is nothing that is more likely to scare a contributor away than |
| 21 |
this frustration and feeling that you actually have to fight for |
| 22 |
acceptance of even trivial contributions. I feel that this is one of the |
| 23 |
reasons that we have an unstable branch, or maybe we could make a new |
| 24 |
keyword? x86 for stable, ~x86 for unstable, and ^x86 for lunatic? :) |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
The tree maintainers finest and most important task, as I see it, is |
| 27 |
making an educated decision about when to change keywording of ebuilds. |
| 28 |
This is the major responsibility since servers are likely to be running |
| 29 |
Stable and must not get hosed, and users running Unstable on their |
| 30 |
desktop pretty much know that things will break from time to time. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Regards |
| 33 |
Frantz Dhin |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
On Tue, 2003-04-22 at 09:38, Klavs Klavsen wrote: |
| 37 |
> Hi guys, |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> I have written these ebuilds: |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> vserver-0.22 |
| 42 |
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19230 |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
> Created because a costumer of mine wanted me to install Gentoo with |
| 45 |
> vserver. I've also talked to a guy named Georges Tooth about making an |
| 46 |
> ebuild that installs a base vserver (aka. skel vserver) that mangles the |
| 47 |
> init-system as needed (it needs to be pretty mangled - to work perfectly |
| 48 |
> and not do anything that requires capabilities as these are removed |
| 49 |
> under vserver :) |
| 50 |
> |
| 51 |
> USAGI-ipv6 tools (the ipv6 impl. in linux-2.5 and in gentoo-sources) |
| 52 |
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=17681 |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> I use IPv6 - so I needed the tools. |
| 55 |
> |
| 56 |
> drip-0.9.0cvs3 (the one in portage was hopelessly outdated) |
| 57 |
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19690 |
| 58 |
> |
| 59 |
> I wanted to try it out :) |
| 60 |
> |
| 61 |
> And also an ipv6calc one - but that got in after Guy Martin fixed a |
| 62 |
> small problem :) |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
> But I haven't gotten any feedback on the rest of the ebuilds :( |
| 65 |
> |
| 66 |
> Is there no interest in these? |
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
|
| 69 |
-- |
| 70 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives