Re: [gentoo-releng] 2004.2 planning

[John Davis]

On Fri, 2004-04-30 at 17:07, Bob Johnson wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Friday 30 April 2004 02:39 pm, John Davis wrote:
> >
> > I respectfully disagree, quite strongly actually. Although we did not
> > complete any of the feature request, which will be something that we
> > have to work on for 2004.2 (that is why I started the process so early),
> > we did get the release out on time and complete. Every release up to
> > 2004.1 was late and broken; 1.4 was almost vaporware and 2004.0 was
> > late. We accomplished something that has never been done with Gentoo
> > before, and I see that as something to be proud of (not to say that we
> > have an enormous amount of room to improve).
> >
>
>
> Zhen i have much respect for the work your doing on livecds now, but are you
> really so blind to the quality?
>
> Ive also seen notes that second kernel will be removed from future releases
> (if we cant fix it remove it) , also framebuffer/bootsplash will be removed..
> (same thing , cant fix it remove it).   If all of Gentoo did this, in  a few
> years portage would be 2 ebuilds and a few scripts..
>
> The process needs to slow down a bit.
>
> And btw this is not just personal feelings, ive had almost all ppl touching
> x86 livecds ask for help.
> 					Bob

Bob -
No, I am not blind to the *numerous* QA problems. I did say that we have
an enormous amount of room to improve, and I really do mean it; I don't
see how that is being blind. We accomplished one of our goals, to get a
release out on time and intact. Now, we work on QA and fix all of the
problems. Its a step by step process, we can't expect to have it all at
once. We have basically gone from nothing to a little bit of something,
now we are moving towards the full something - each part takes time.

I can honestly say to you that there have never been, and never will be,
plans to remove a feature just because we cannot get it to work. Not
only is that bad practice, but it shows that we are not competent in our
jobs. As long as two kernels are viable, we will use them. As long as we
have bootsplash we will use it. If you know where these notes are,
please tell me as they are completely wrong and need to be removed. 

If we do decide to move to 2.6 only it is because better hardware
support. I really don't see the need to keep 2.4 around if 2.6 is 100%
compatible with all scenarios. Even if we do go the 2.6 route, the
multiple kernel bug will be fixed as many more people than releng use
Catalyst to do many more things. Bootsplash though will always remain
(for supported arches) - there is no reason to get rid of it.

I hope this clears up some issues -

Cheers,
//zhen



-- 
John Davis
Gentoo Linux Developer
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~zhen>

----
GnuPG Public Key: <http://dev.gentoo.org/~zhen/zhen_pub.asc>
Fingerprint: 2364 71BD 4BC2 705D F338  FF70 6650 1235 1946 2D47