Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Stefan Schweizer <genstef@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Project Sunrise -- Proposal
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2006 13:28:49
Message-Id: e6jpl5$ubu$2@sea.gmane.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise -- Proposal by Henrik Brix Andersen
1 Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
2 > On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 06:53:51PM +0100, Stuart Herbert wrote:
3 >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
4 >> Hash: SHA1
5 >>
6 >> Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
7 >> | However, as has been pointed out several times in this thread already,
8 >> | back when the devloper community agreed to the overlays project it was
9 >> | also agreed that projects similar to what is now known as Project
10 >> | Sunrise was not be present on overlays.gentoo.org.
11 >>
12 >> Can you provide a reference to this, please? I've been through my -dev
13 >> M/L archive several times, and cannot find an email where I agreed to
14 >> this.
15 >
16 > Perhaps not in those exact words, I admit. But the general consensus
17 > in my eyes, and I'm not alone with this view according to other
18 > replies to this thread, was that the purpose of overlays.gentoo.org
19 > would be to provide a common place to host project and developer
20 > overlays - not a place to host Joe User's ebuild contributions (except
21 > for users regularly contributing to specific teams/herds and
22 > devs-in-spee). [1] [2] [3]
23 I think you misunderstand the Sunrise Project. I will tell you why the
24 Sunrise Project in fact complies to all these rules.
25
26 It only hosts ebuilds that have been reviewed by Gentoo developers or
27 directly committed by "regular contributors" that have taken the ebuild
28 quiz, we name them "trusted committers". We have not yet fleshed out how it
29 works, but believe me we are watching the quality of the overlay and we
30 certainly will not let it rot.
31 You believe we do not have the manpower for this as you have stated in many
32 other threads. But currently we are coping well with the ebuild submissions
33 we get. Additionally #gentoo-dev-help is of big help for us.
34 All current contributors to the Sunrise overlay take effort to improve their
35 ebuild skills and listen to our words closely. I would consider them all as
36 devs-in-spee, I am personally planning to recruit some of them when they
37 have reached a certain level of ebuild writing. They are all around in IRC
38 (as noted in the [1]-mail by stuart you referenced).
39
40 > You could argue that Project Sunrise *is* a specific project. Fact is
41 > that nobody at that time could predict that a small group of
42 > developers would go ahead and create a project with the single goal of
43 > providing Joe User's bugzilla-contributed ebuilds to end-users through
44 > overlays.gentoo.org.
45
46 The Sunrise overlay hosts many ebuilds that do not have a herd in CC. It
47 also hosts ebuilds for herds that do not have their own overlay or are not
48 interested in recruiting new contributors. Herds who wish to work with the
49 contributor in a different way are already doing that, and we encourage
50 people to use existing herd/team-specfic infrastructure if there is one.
51
52 Quote from the FAQ
53 --Can I commit everything I like to the overlay?--
54 Herds could also have a better official overlay for herd related packages.
55 For example you should not add packages from the PHP overlay or concerning
56 PHP to the Sunrise overlay, rather ask for access to the PHP or Webapps
57 overlay and talk to those herds first, depending on where you feel your
58 package should go.
59 -------
60 The Sunrise project catches all ebuilds that a specific herd does not have
61 the resources or interest in catching. We make sure that contributions have
62 a certain level of QA and are not ignored. As soon as a specific herd/team
63 wants to work on the ebuilds themselves we remove the ebuild from the
64 Sunrise overlay.
65
66 Our single goal is not to provide Joe User's ebuilds, we have more goals:
67 - provide a central home for contributed ebuilds that do not (yet) find a
68 place in the portage tree
69 - encourage users to write ebuilds
70 - find new recruits
71 - make maintainer-wanted ebuild access and development easier
72 - work with users on new ebuilds and explain them what they can do better
73 Those are also mentioned on our Project Page[1]
74
75 > In my opinion, creating a new project with this purpose should not
76 > have been allowed.
77 In what other form should we do something like this in your opinion. Should
78 we be recruiters or mentors? I think creating a project and listening to
79 and working in the many comments on the mailing lists was a good idea.
80
81 > I fear that perhaps creating the project was just
82 > an attempt to circumvent the policy of overlays.gentoo.org, which
83 > states that only project teams and individual Gentoo developers can
84 > have an overlay on overlays.gentoo.org.
85 Sorry, how are we circumventing the policy? We want an overlay where more
86 than one person (me and jokey and the users) work together on improving
87 ebuilds. This is not sensible to do in a developer overlay. We need a
88 project overlay.
89
90 > It seems that the developers
91 > who started Project Sunrise already planed to use overlays.gentoo.org
92 > as a "free-for-all" overlay with no QA and policy checks back when the
93 > idea of an official overlays project was discussed. [4] [5]
94
95 You are making two assumptions("free-for-all" and no QA) that are no longer
96 true. Those may have been true with the initial announcement but we have
97 seen that the Gentoo developer community has good points and that it
98 actually works better when we educate people and have all ebuilds reviewed
99 by Gentoo developers. It is only accessible for people who want to commit
100 something and it is only fully accessible when they have taken the ebuild
101 quiz. Sure everyone can come and help, but I see this policy as being more
102 strict and quality-assuring than what is currently done in the project
103 overlays currently.
104
105
106 > The security issues of having an official overlay of unsupported
107 > ebuilds was also raised back then. [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] As was the
108 > concerns about potential damage to the reputation of Gentoo as a
109 > whole. [11] [12]
110 These comments mostly ignore the fact, that we have QA in place now,
111 everything must be reviewed by gentoo developers. And that the ebuild is
112 _not_ free-for-all, it is only open to people who stick to the rules. We
113 are just actively encouraging people to help and improve their ebuild
114 skills by helping, not giving access out blindly.
115
116 > On the other hand, having team/herd specific overlays with commit
117 > access from a select few end-users (as was written in the original
118 > proposal) was seen as a good idea. [13] [14]
119 Yes, we are giving commit access only to people who have something to
120 contribute! In fact we are no different from any other herd/team overlay
121 just that we have QA (review), good HOWTOs and actively encourage people to
122 come to us and get our advice and offer their help.
123
124
125 > I've spent tonight reading through the entire thread that let to the
126 > creation of the overlays project, and I still come out in the end with
127 > the feeling that a consensus of having overlays.gentoo.org for hosting
128 > the already existing developer and herd/team overlays in a central
129 > place was reached. It also looks to me like the idea of having a
130 > "free-for-all" or a user-contrib overlay hosted there would not be
131 > acceptable due to security issues and risk of damaging the reputation
132 > of Gentoo as a whole.
133
134 The overlay has been running for some days and I have not seen any "security
135 issues" or damage to our reputation. I am always checking the changes to
136 the overlay and reviewing user ebuilds. Sorry, that needs to be proven. I
137 am argueing that this is not the case with our current review process.
138
139 But you have a valid security point and I am thinking about putting up
140 signed tarballs of a revision where all commits are reviewed.
141
142 > I know this doesn't provide solid evidence that this is how it was,
143 > but truth is - we hardly ever see an email on the developers list
144 > stating "This is what we agreed on". Due to the nature of the media we
145 > tend to have a lot of input and discussion back and forth after which
146 > a general consensus is found. This consensus, as I see it, is
147 > reflected in the policy for overlays.gentoo.org. [15]
148 That is what Stuart meant in his mail - it is not forbidden to create a new
149 project just for recruiting and supporting new people that are eager to
150 help. I think this helps gentoo as a whole and in fact helps our reputation
151 as a community distribution which is open for new developers.
152
153 > I urge people to read through the initial thread that fostered
154 > overlays.gentoo.org as well - if only to refresh peoples memory on the
155 > stuff that was discussed back then. You can start at
156 > http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg09877.html
157 >
158 > Sincerely,
159 > Brix
160 >
161 > [1]: http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg09913.html
162 > [2]: http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg09921.html
163 > [3]: http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg09983.html
164 >
165 > [4]: http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg09962.html
166 > [5]: http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg09966.html
167 >
168 > [6]: http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg09918.html
169 > [7]: http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg09959.html
170 > [8]: http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg09884.html
171 > [9]: http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg09964.html
172 > [10]:
173 > [http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg09963.html
174 > [11]:
175 > [http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg09910.html
176 > [12]:
177 > [http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg09946.html
178 >
179 > [13]:
180 > [http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg09948.html
181 > [14]:
182 > [http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@l.g.o/msg09972.html
183 >
184 > [15]: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/overlays/policy.xml
185 just the project page from me :)
186
187 [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/sunrise
188
189 Really I appreciate your effort, but it could be much more wisely used in
190 pointing out to us what is not sensible in our goals and policies. I would
191 really love to make this project a success and acceptable to you, and
192 throwing the same arguments at each other won't help in making it
193 successfull.
194 Please, please work with us instead of against us - really, working together
195 is one of the essential parts of Gentoo and I fear it is forgotten more
196 often recently.
197
198 Regards,
199 Stefan
200
201 --
202 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Project Sunrise -- Proposal Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>