| 1 |
On Tue, 2007-10-16 at 00:20 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 12:01 Tue 16 Oct , Andrey G. Grozin wrote: |
| 3 |
> > The original cryos' idea when he created the science overlay was a place to |
| 4 |
> > develop ebuilds until they become mature enough to be moved to the main |
| 5 |
> > tree (I can dig his original post about this subject). He suggested that |
| 6 |
> > ebuilds whould, in most cases, be moved to the main tree quickly enough. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> OK, sure, but historic reasons are not future reasons. If things should |
| 9 |
> change, this is not a reason to hold it back. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
These days, the overlay is more of a sandbox for devs and a place to |
| 13 |
ease package transition from bugzilla to the tree. Why some packages are |
| 14 |
still in the overlay rather than in the main tree to me is only a matter |
| 15 |
of manpower. Hopefully some day Gentoo will get more modular- right now |
| 16 |
our cvs repository is gigantic and as you all know this means more |
| 17 |
inertia. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> > 1. Inform users *prominently* that some interesting packages don't live in |
| 20 |
> > the main portage tree (currently, not many users know this). |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Yep. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Well anyone who has commit access to the overlay is welcome to add |
| 26 |
anything relevant to the wiki trac page. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> - Is it expected to be fairly popular, or is it extremely specific? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
It's hard to judge this. We have the CC and votes at bugs.gentoo.org, |
| 31 |
but as useful as bugzilla could be, it is not the zen-est interface. |
| 32 |
Many times I feel that our tendency to resolve all issues with bugzilla |
| 33 |
reduces productivity both for bugs reporters and bugs resolvers. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Anyway it is nice to see the science project is generating interest. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
-- |
| 38 |
Sébastien |
Archives