| 1 |
On Tuesday 15 July 2003 12:19, Stuart Herbert wrote: |
| 2 |
> John, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> > By creating this document, I hope to help fix the problems |
| 5 |
> > that I see with Gentoo Linux. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Mmm ... the problems I see with Gentoo Linux seem to be a little different: |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> a) ebuilds marked stable w/ no robust QA procedures |
| 10 |
> b) unmaintained ebuilds |
| 11 |
> c) too many packages that Gentoo has no ebuilds for (yet ;-) |
| 12 |
> d) bugs not addressed quickly enough |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
I hope you realise that your desires are conflicting. more ebuilds leads to |
| 16 |
more unmaintained ebuilds. More QA needs more time. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
We are trying to address these problems in a way that is satisfactory for |
| 19 |
everyone. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
<big cut> |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> So I'm calling for the debate to shift away from politics, and onto |
| 24 |
> practicalities. Where are the *procedural* problems with Gentoo? What can |
| 25 |
> be done to get more ebuilds into portage, make it easier to keep ebuilds up |
| 26 |
> to date with current releases, and all whilst improving the quality of the |
| 27 |
> (dare I say it) 'customer experience'? Damnit - *these* are the things |
| 28 |
> that should matter. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Be assured that these issues are being addressed. This requires time though, |
| 31 |
as restructuring is necessary for it to happen. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Paul |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 37 |
Researcher |
| 38 |
Mail: pauldv@××××××.nl |
| 39 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives