| 1 |
On Sat, 30 Mar 2002 10:40, Chris Johnson got a bunch of monkeys together |
| 2 |
and come up with: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> What I don't like about this, and catching Aaron Cohen's tone perhaps in |
| 5 |
> his follow-up email ("Great, we will be a Debian Want a be!"), is the |
| 6 |
> complexity of a set of cvs branches, stability levels, etc. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> It's what has made a mess of debian from the perspective of having |
| 9 |
> mature packages float to the top and become available in a timely |
| 10 |
> manner. See, if I run debian, I have to make all sorts of decisions |
| 11 |
> about what stability level, which tree, which mirrors, etc. I want to |
| 12 |
> connect to. With the quality of ebuilds and the ease of the gentoo |
| 13 |
> system, we can have much lower complexity and higher quality. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> I vote strongly against any cvs branches of the portage tree--that's why |
| 16 |
> we currently have the -rx designations, anyway! Leverage that and the |
| 17 |
> organic nature of the community (i.e., see my proposal at |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
http://relentless.org:8000/gentoo/forum/message?message_id=6584&forum_id=6581 |
| 20 |
> ) to get a simple, effective system. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Please, avoid the duplication of effort that all the branches of debian |
| 23 |
> represent! |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> Chris |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Fair enough... I realise that the -rx designations are there, however I |
| 28 |
have had -rx .ebuilds fail on numerous occassions because there was simply |
| 29 |
not enough testing before the ebuild was submitted to CVS. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
This is fine if you already have a package installed ... simply file a bug, |
| 32 |
or slap the ebuild maintainer on IRC and in a few hours (a day or two at |
| 33 |
most) the ebuild is fixed and away you go. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
The problem comes when a new user is trying to build their system and they |
| 36 |
get all these errors. We don't want to discourage newcomers by having a |
| 37 |
tree of ebuilds that is not 100% stable for their first installation. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
That was my main reason for suggesting seperate CVS branch(es). |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
I agree that Gentoo is not targeted at the "I've never seen linux before |
| 42 |
and thought I'd give it a go" type of user (that's what RH & MDK do), but I |
| 43 |
don't think we should make new users jump through too many hoops simply |
| 44 |
because an ebuild maintainer has hastily submitted an ebuild -- |
| 45 |
particularly for core packages (baselayout is one that comes to mind). |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
Perhaps a comprimise .... |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
A stable/install CVS branch that is only used during the initial |
| 51 |
bootstrap/build process and afterwards portage defaults to using the |
| 52 |
regular CVS tree? |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
Still it is a refreshing way to get my linux "fix"! |
| 55 |
|
| 56 |
-- |
| 57 |
Troy Dack |
| 58 |
http://linuxserver.tkdack.com |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
The onset and the waning of love make themselves felt in the uneasiness |
| 61 |
experienced at being alone together. |
| 62 |
-- Jean de la Bruyere |
Archives