| 1 |
Kito wrote: |
| 2 |
>> Would you like to lead this sub-project, define roles, tasks and roll |
| 3 |
>> out a todo list or some minimalistic readme, so people can get |
| 4 |
>> involved and perhaps start wondering around in the code? |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> I'm not sure it warrants a sub-project, but if the consensus is that it |
| 7 |
> does, I suppose I could lead it if noone else wants to. Hopefully I'll |
| 8 |
> have some stuff to post in the coming week - an xml project page, very |
| 9 |
> very rough 'getting started' doc, a prefixed os x stage1/3, pkg |
| 10 |
> installer, and overlay snapshot. Considering the fragile nature of it |
| 11 |
> all, and that whatever we/I come up with will function merely as a |
| 12 |
> working prototype, I'm not sure how 'official' it should really get... |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
sub-project is as large as you want it to be. I didn't want to write |
| 15 |
'project' because I don't want to refer to the Gentoo for OSX project as |
| 16 |
a whole. This thing of portage with prefixes, that's what I meant and |
| 17 |
it's yours. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
>> Because I still don't understand the idea of progressive, and I do |
| 20 |
>> understand myself a bit sometimes. So for me, progressive is a skim |
| 21 |
>> that exists in bugzilla, but every bug assigned to progressive is |
| 22 |
>> basically dead. ~ppc-macos is simply the testing side of the mainline |
| 23 |
>> product we have. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> But again, without the progressive profile, this past weekend when it |
| 26 |
> came time to get all the system packages merging, I would have been |
| 27 |
> starting from square1, as opposed to being able to quickly take |
| 28 |
> advantage of ~12 months of hard work. Had we/I not had this means of |
| 29 |
> keywording packages that collide with apple files, I'd still be fighting |
| 30 |
> with spanky on getting the bash ebuild darwin-safe, instead of tackling |
| 31 |
> the global problems of getting prefixes working. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Yes, but then I come in again from my management perspective, and I say: |
| 34 |
"Progressive as in user product doesn't work!". |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
But really. The work you describe is pure development efforts (luckily) |
| 37 |
spent before you could actually use it. It takes insight and |
| 38 |
recognition to do something like that. Kudos to you to identify the |
| 39 |
need upfront! |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
I would personally 'hide' it away behind a development thing, not cover |
| 42 |
it under "this is for the real die hards that want bleeding edge stuff: |
| 43 |
progressive". Because in the latter it isn't clear why you're doing it, |
| 44 |
and some users might think it's simply *cool*. No, it should be a clear |
| 45 |
development thing with development hazards, absolutely not meant for any |
| 46 |
user, unless those that want to sacrifice and contribute their 'blood'. |
| 47 |
Well, ok, that's my thinking. |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
>> The only way out of there is what ciarmn would like to see |
| 50 |
>> the best: remove the full ppc-macos keyword from the tree. Then what |
| 51 |
>> ciarmn wouldn't like so much to see is that you can start all over |
| 52 |
>> from scratch in an overlay. |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> I'm not sure I followed that thought. |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
It's IMHO just not an option. At least I won't allow you to do it. :) |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
Anyway, it's good to know that we're basically on the same route. |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
-- |
| 62 |
Fabian Groffen |
| 63 |
Gentoo for Mac OS X Project -- Interim Lead |
| 64 |
-- |
| 65 |
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |
Archives