1 |
On Wed, 14 Mar 2007 14:41:10 -0700 Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> |
2 |
wrote: |
3 |
> Portage is being incrementally improved. I'm not trying to rag on the |
4 |
> former or the current portage crew; certainly it moves slowly. Much |
5 |
> of it needs rewriting; my preference is to have more tests so that |
6 |
> when stuff gets rewritten people aren't completly ruining the existing |
7 |
> system, so my focus has been on tests and docs. Occasionally I work |
8 |
> on features (glep 42 was one of those). People are free to submit |
9 |
> patches and I think the portage team^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Zac does a decent |
10 |
> job of integrating them. The only recent one that didn't get applied |
11 |
> was the parallelization one; and I think zmedico has some plans for |
12 |
> how he wants to accomplish that. |
13 |
|
14 |
You're avoiding my point. The improvements that are being made are, by |
15 |
and large, insignificant. Portage doesn't need a few little tweaks now |
16 |
and again. It has to start delivering a whole load of major new |
17 |
features (there's no one killer feature), and quickly. |
18 |
|
19 |
GLEP 42 shouldn't be a major undertaking. It should be a day's work. |
20 |
That it isn't is a sign of how seriously screwed up things are. |
21 |
|
22 |
As for submitting patches to Portage... Heh, you know as well as I do |
23 |
that that's a lost cause. If people who've been working on the code for |
24 |
years can't deliver, what hope does anyone else have? |
25 |
|
26 |
> > It's been claimed that Gentoo lacks direction. It's more accurate to |
27 |
> > say that the inability to change Portage prevents Gentoo from going |
28 |
> > anywhere. That small interface improvements can be passed off as a |
29 |
> > big deal and that users get excited over minor config file tweaks is |
30 |
> > indicative of how low people's expectations really are. |
31 |
> |
32 |
> The portage team has always been hesitant to break backwards |
33 |
> compatibility; the advantage of competing programs such as your own |
34 |
> (paludis) and pkgcore is that you don't have the whole of Gentoo's |
35 |
> user-base and you can remain much more agile in that type of space. |
36 |
|
37 |
Largely irrelevant. What you mean there is, "there's no way of changing |
38 |
Portage in such a way that we can be sure it won't explode horribly, |
39 |
because we have no static checking, no design consistency and far too |
40 |
few test cases". |
41 |
|
42 |
> I also think either you are ignoring the changes or you are just |
43 |
> unaware of things that the portage team (aka Zac for the most |
44 |
> part ;)) has been working on. Many of these things are internal |
45 |
> behind the scenes changes and they don't require any user-level |
46 |
> modification. |
47 |
|
48 |
That's just it. Portage needs to deliver major visible improvements at |
49 |
the user level for Gentoo to get anywhere. Managing a Gentoo system is |
50 |
much harder now than it was a few years ago, but the tools are largely |
51 |
the same. |
52 |
|
53 |
> > * The wrong idea of what the user base is, and what the target user |
54 |
> > base is. Gentoo's direction is too heavily influenced by a small |
55 |
> > number of extremely noisy ricer forum users, many of whom don't |
56 |
> > even run Gentoo. Unfortunately, this self-perpetuating clique |
57 |
> > wields huge amounts of influence. |
58 |
> |
59 |
> I was certain that Gentoo's direction was influenced by the people |
60 |
> working on Gentoo; not ricers. Do you have any examples of when the |
61 |
> ricers changed the direction of things in Gentoo. |
62 |
|
63 |
Sunrise is the canonical example. Also consider the way the forums are |
64 |
being run (like it or not, the forums are taken by many to be |
65 |
representative of Gentoo's user base)... |
66 |
|
67 |
-- |
68 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
69 |
Mail : ciaranm at ciaranm.org |
70 |
Web : http://ciaranm.org/ |
71 |
Paludis, the secure package manager : http://paludis.pioto.org/ |