| 1 |
Jan Bilek wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Feb 4, 2008 7:50 AM, Alec Warner wrote: |
| 3 |
>> I'm really digging for specifics here. 'bleeding edge' is very |
| 4 |
>> unspecific. It is my experience that major updates are available |
| 5 |
>> hours or days after release. Are you dissatisfied that this is not |
| 6 |
>> true for some packages, or dissatisfied that the packages are marked |
| 7 |
>> for testing and masked instead of being stable or ~arch? |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> A couple of years ago when a new version of any application appeared |
| 10 |
> some Gentoo users popped out in some discussion immediately laughing |
| 11 |
> "haha, we've got it in our official tree, we are the first ones..." - |
| 12 |
> Gentoo used to be famous for that;-) |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
Well it still is bleeding edge imo, it's just that stuff new to the tree tends |
| 15 |
to go on in overlays. Apart from losing bragging rights, I don't see a |
| 16 |
downside to counter the associated increase in QA. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> When I started with Gentoo my /etc/portage/package.use used to be |
| 19 |
> empty. Now I have a lot of ~x86s (and I have never had any trouble |
| 20 |
> with them - do all of them need to be ~ed?). |
| 21 |
No, you most likely should be unmasking specific versions, so that when the |
| 22 |
glitch is over, you can delete the old unmasks. autounmask handles that all |
| 23 |
for you nowadays (it deletes old entries when no longer in use.) Unmasking |
| 24 |
with no version is really only for packages that one personally has an |
| 25 |
interest in, imo. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
<snip> |
| 28 |
> - you can see many users claiming they left Gentoo and have chosen |
| 29 |
> Arch. I am not saying it means anything about Gentoo - but I think |
| 30 |
> it's good to know about it. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Indeed. The only thing that'll stop it though is if more work is done on |
| 33 |
Gentoo for beginners. That's not its traditional market, but #gentoo-guis is |
| 34 |
working towards that. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
> I am not saying it's necessarily bad thing to be a bit slower than the |
| 37 |
> most bleeding-edge distros. Maybe it's because Gentoo has better QA |
| 38 |
> than for example Arch. Maybe this is just one of these things that |
| 39 |
> need to be explained to users - a communication issue again. But some |
| 40 |
> people claim it is because of a lack of manpower in Gentoo - in that |
| 41 |
> case we might want to re-think recruitment process. |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
As pointed out, just get involved ;) If someone is rude, just don't deal with |
| 44 |
him or her anymore. There are loads of devs, so you're bound to run into at |
| 45 |
least a couple who annoy you. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
>> Arrogant? I'd imagine some are; I personally try not to be and I'm |
| 49 |
>> sure I fail at it quite often. |
| 50 |
>> |
| 51 |
>> I don't think Gentoo is a club for elitests |
| 52 |
> |
| 53 |
> I don't think that either. I just wanted to say that I had observed |
| 54 |
> many users who think so and many of them claim to have left Gentoo |
| 55 |
> because of that - which means there is something wrong with |
| 56 |
> communication again. Why are Gentoo developers perceived as arrogant? |
| 57 |
Some of them are. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
> Does the arrogant minority get more attention than decent majority? |
| 60 |
Yes. |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
> Why? |
| 63 |
They tend to be quite vocal. |
| 64 |
|
| 65 |
> I think Gentoo needs better tools to manage it's PR. |
| 66 |
> |
| 67 |
Agreed, and the pr@g.o project is on that case: why not mail them and |
| 68 |
see if you can help out? |
| 69 |
|
| 70 |
> |
| 71 |
>> I certainly develop for myself and not for users. Now this is a fine |
| 72 |
>> line to walk. Developing for yourself means you work at your own |
| 73 |
>> pace; it doesn't give you the right to be mean to folks or to |
| 74 |
>> contribute negatively. It means you don't really get deadlines and |
| 75 |
>> you get to choose what to work on regardless of others input. |
| 76 |
>> |
| 77 |
Exactly. |
| 78 |
|
| 79 |
<snip> |
| 80 |
> IMO Gentoo needs a better conflict-management tool to manage internal |
| 81 |
> relations (a better and more powerful mechanism how to watch and |
| 82 |
> possibly get rid of troublemakers before many developers and users are |
| 83 |
> lost because of their behavior, and maybe some other way how to solve |
| 84 |
> the conflict without at least one side of a dispute leaving Gentoo...) |
| 85 |
> and proactive positive PR. |
| 86 |
> |
| 87 |
Well first is devrel, and that's a new team so I think it's best to see how |
| 88 |
they perform for at least 6 months. Latter is moving ahead; the news snippets |
| 89 |
are great, especially with the new link to forum topic. |
| 90 |
-- |
| 91 |
gentoo-nfp@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives