| 1 |
On Sun, Nov 1, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Considering the original plan was to have changelogs auto-generated |
| 3 |
> from git and still serving the tree via rsync, where's the relevant |
| 4 |
> discussion and decision about this? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
What discussion or decision is necessary? As far as I'm aware nobody |
| 7 |
has forbidden making changelogs available via rsync. It just sounds |
| 8 |
like there is a bug in their generation. What is needed is for those |
| 9 |
who want changelogs to fix the bug, not endless discussion. If the |
| 10 |
issue is infra access, just make your own mirror with working code and |
| 11 |
I'm sure infra will borrow it, and if not nobody really HAS to use |
| 12 |
infra. I'm syncing from the github mirror that contains pre-generated |
| 13 |
metadata for convenience, which is just one of the many options |
| 14 |
available. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Nobody is actively preventing anybody from having what they want. |
| 17 |
This isn't some corporation where we are paying people and we can |
| 18 |
demand that the responsible parties fix things or lose their jobs. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Lots of effort has gone into making the git migration as seamless as |
| 21 |
possible, but it was bound to be imperfect. Personally I would have |
| 22 |
been fine with less effort being spent on it than actually was. |
| 23 |
Gentoo has never been a hand-holding distro. I have nothing against |
| 24 |
people who choose to invest their time into making it more helpful to |
| 25 |
those who wish to use alternate tools (like changelogs), but I don't |
| 26 |
favor telling those who are working on new features to not actually |
| 27 |
deploy them unless THEY spend their time on such things as long as we |
| 28 |
have a reasonable path forward for everybody. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
So, if you want to see what has changed there are half a dozen ways of |
| 31 |
doing it without using changelogs. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
Rich |
Archives