| 1 |
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 2:04 AM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 12:29 PM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> I don't know of literally any big project except gentoo that still does |
| 4 |
>> not _require_ a review workflow. Git would be the perfect excuse to |
| 5 |
>> "make it happen", but that's something people have to agree on. |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Gentoo is a release-less distro. First, most projects that aren't |
| 9 |
> distros aren't really comparable to a linux distro because most |
| 10 |
> projects represent something unified in design, while distros tend to |
| 11 |
> be diverse collections. Distros that involve releases naturally |
| 12 |
> involve review/testing/etc, as there is the concept that the release |
| 13 |
> should be fairly free of bugs. In Gentoo there is no expectation that |
| 14 |
> the distro is ever free of bugs - there is just WAY too much churn and |
| 15 |
> there is never some kind of concept of overall quality. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> The other problem with a reviewer workflow is that most Gentoo devs |
| 18 |
> don't want to be or deal with reviewers. It is hard enough to get |
| 19 |
> maintainers to just not block collaboration entirely. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> If you want to do THAT big of a cultural change, you'd probably be |
| 22 |
> better off just forking the distro, as you'll end up having to ditch |
| 23 |
> almost all the current devs anyway. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Hi, just an ordinary 9-years user here. I hope you don't mind my asking. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Is it really official that most significant people on Gentoo don't like the |
| 28 |
change from CVS to Git? Has there been a general discussion about it, and |
| 29 |
what is basically everyone's general argument to it? Just in case attempts |
| 30 |
to change were already made, what were technically the biggest things that |
| 31 |
prevented it? |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
And I also once thought that having a decentralized Gentoo would be good |
| 34 |
(yes, even more than just being distributed), but perhaps it would be just |
| 35 |
too risky to implemented right away in Gentoo. Perhaps having an |
| 36 |
experimental fork were devs in Gentoo would give support would be nice and |
| 37 |
consider merging it back later if it's already mature enough. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Nevertheless I don't think using Git itself is exactly being decentralized, |
| 40 |
and probably a more flexible and distributed version of the current Gentoo. |
| 41 |
If it's concerns about reviews that people may or may not want, I think |
| 42 |
there are still some other good benefits of using Git besides it. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
And I'm one who considered sharing some of the ebuilds I made for myself, |
| 45 |
but I really dislike personally contacting the developer in charged, or |
| 46 |
posting over-formal reports in bugzilla. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
Directly giving a pull request to a developer's repository in Github should |
| 49 |
be easiest and of great convenience. It also gives me the confidence that |
| 50 |
my report would surely be noticed and noticed right away. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
The ebuilds I shared would also need not to be merged. People can just |
| 53 |
look at the forks of an official repository and see of those would be a |
| 54 |
fitting solution for them. I wouldn't need a mentor for it. |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
About using Github by the way, I just mentioned it because I prefer it and |
| 57 |
it would not need to be the official repository. The official repository |
| 58 |
can still reside in Gentoo's servers but mirrors can be placed in Github |
| 59 |
for the sake of better collaboration. Of course I'm not suggesting that |
| 60 |
every mirror needs to have the whole portage tree. |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
Cheers, |
| 63 |
konsolebox |
Archives