| 1 |
> |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> ...is this something we (as the developer base) WANT non-dev's to be |
| 4 |
> able to do?? I would expect we'd want the tree to still be treated as |
| 5 |
> read-only-not-modifyable by the rest of the gentoo/linux community, |
| 6 |
> otherwise we're going to have a rather large mess on our hands |
| 7 |
> (multiple forks of the main tree != a uniform main tree + overlays, |
| 8 |
> the way it does now) |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Yes, we want them to. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
There is still going to be a "master" authoritative tree, forks of |
| 13 |
that tree will exist for the purpose of adding new ebuilds to the |
| 14 |
master tree / bumping existing packages. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
If your worry is "There are copies of gentoo /usr/portage out there |
| 17 |
that aren't GIT HEAD" , then stop worrying, as thats already the case. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
As soon as somebody modifies a file in their local /usr/portage, that |
| 20 |
happens, and as soon as a users portage tree gets older than 1 hour, |
| 21 |
that happens. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
And if your worry is "But they could be replicating it in that form", |
| 24 |
then don't worry, they could already be doing that, nothing is |
| 25 |
stopping people from re-providing their full (tweaked) /usr/portage |
| 26 |
via rsync to others. In fact, if you're running in a network with a |
| 27 |
network master, you're doing that to an extent. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
But those sources are not official, and have no utility outside |
| 30 |
development/private use scenarios, and thus, don't compete with |
| 31 |
overlays directly. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Sure, you *could* make something like an overlay by forking gentoo |
| 34 |
master and then maintaining that, but it would be impractical, and |
| 35 |
you'd be better off using a plain overlay ( less noise ), or using |
| 36 |
that fork for the purpose of getting things in master. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
You /could/ do a long-lived public maintained fork, and then you'd be |
| 39 |
Sabyon / Funtoo. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Doing this has its own difficulties, but I think long term, enabling |
| 42 |
this is good: |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
Sabyon/Funtoo can fork gentoo on github, and then any improvements |
| 45 |
made on their forks, gentoo can easily steal back, and its easier to |
| 46 |
track the differences between them. Win/Win in my books. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
Summarised: |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
Yes, its a good idea. |
| 51 |
No, we shouldn't try stopping them. |
| 52 |
Actually, really can't stop them, its already happening, Git will just |
| 53 |
make the workflow better on top of it. |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
-- |
| 56 |
Kent |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
perl -e "print substr( \"edrgmaM SPA NOcomil.ic\\@tfrken\", \$_ * 3, |
| 59 |
3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 );" |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
http://kent-fredric.fox.geek.nz |
Archives