Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

[Consus]

On 09:53 Fri 10 Jun, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> > So forgive me for being blind .. but we were talking about going
> > -away- from central, curated repositories, and now we've come full
> > circle to the situation we have now with overlays, mostly
> > controlled in some way by gentoo .. so, do tell me .. what's the
> > difference?!
> Some things. For users, the main difference is that their repositories
> are central and can be grown in a modular manner. Their repositories
> would likely be amalgamations of our curated and reviewed
> repositories, and some more obscure ones from specific areas they are
> interested in. This is very similar to what we have today, save for
> the public user repositories. A central index, as pointed out by Zac,
> would ideally be Accompanying the public repositories. Via this hub,
> users could review each other's ebuilds, and so on.

That's great, but how are you gonna prevent nodejs-like clusterfuck
(happened not so long ago: some guy just removed his packaged and
suddenly everything was broken)? Or any other kind of
screw-you-guys-im-doing-it-my-way behavior? We already have a lot of
issues (like nobody gives a damn about broken packages for weeks) due to
lack of manpower. In my opinion, we need more people with commit access,
not a bunch of standalone repos managed by some random dudes.

> For our central repositories, the main difference would be having more
> repositories, to ensure that we are as modular as possible, so that
> users can more easily e.g. pick and choose external repositories
> instead of what we suggest and recommend, or completely get rid of
> components they don't need or want.

Splitting one giant repo in a bunch of smaller ones (like
haskell-overlay for example) is actually a good idea.