1 |
On Mon, 21 Oct 2013 20:16:01 +0100 |
2 |
Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> Lets calm down a little bit. Our documentation is nowhere near perfect |
5 |
> and common sense is not always obvious (we have hundreds of people |
6 |
> claiming that the opposite). Instead of arguing in public how about we |
7 |
> contribute some patches in devmanual to avoid similar problems in the |
8 |
> future? |
9 |
|
10 |
Hello, that indeed should be the way to go; but I came across something |
11 |
relevant to this, as I was searching for an unrelated devmanual bug. |
12 |
|
13 |
It seems like we do should discuss this in public: |
14 |
|
15 |
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=304435#c33 (Comment 33) |
16 |
|
17 |
Looking a bit back up, it seems I've got a blanket to touch them: |
18 |
|
19 |
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=304435#c23 (Comment 23) |
20 |
|
21 |
And that's also probably why a lot of other people have done so. |
22 |
|
23 |
Though I agree with Jeroen Roovers as to why not to, because it results |
24 |
in more work (as more files are touched) and there are some arches that |
25 |
simply don't want it. So, I think we should proceed with discussing |
26 |
this amongst the architectures and perhaps council and then proceed on |
27 |
getting it into the devmanual so that we can act consistently. |
28 |
|
29 |
Therefore I suggest that the arch teams and/or the council clarify when |
30 |
developers can touch which files in the architecture sub directories of |
31 |
profiles/. |
32 |
|
33 |
I do want to help by writing up a patch, but I'd like to see consensus |
34 |
first to avoid documenting something that not every arch team follows. |
35 |
|
36 |
I'd suggest we discuss and/or vote on Jeroen Roovers' opinion: |
37 |
|
38 |
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/88609 |
39 |
|
40 |
Prior discussion that lead to this: |
41 |
|
42 |
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/88562 (frames) |
43 |
http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gentoo/dev/279926 (plain) |
44 |
|
45 |
The bug that has lead to the prior discussion: |
46 |
|
47 |
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=488318 |
48 |
|
49 |
Prior discussion with Jeroen Roovers' opinion that was not answered to: |
50 |
|
51 |
http://gentoo.2317880.n4.nabble.com/best-way-to-use-profiles-and-package-use-mask-td16465.html |
52 |
|
53 |
Please note that I do not intend a negative connotation with the word; |
54 |
I agree with it, as it seems like common sense to me. But I just label |
55 |
it opinion because I am unsure if this is collaborative knowledge [or |
56 |
common sense] among archictecture teams; in any case, for outstanders |
57 |
this is undocumented which can lead to moments of misunderstanding. |
58 |
|
59 |
Thank you very much in advance. |
60 |
|
61 |
CC-ed: Arch leads, frequent arch member, related persons, council. |
62 |
|
63 |
-- |
64 |
With kind regards, |
65 |
|
66 |
Tom Wijsman (TomWij) |
67 |
Gentoo Developer |
68 |
|
69 |
E-mail address : TomWij@g.o |
70 |
GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D |
71 |
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D |