1 |
On Saturday 10 January 2004 20:13, foser wrote: |
2 |
> On Tue, 2004-01-06 at 19:56, George Shapovalov wrote: |
3 |
> > That description is based around the idea of "splitting" the tree (via |
4 |
> > the means of KEYWORDS for example, but lots have changed since, we might |
5 |
> > want another way now) into "official" (with its further stable/testing) |
6 |
> > and "user" areas (considered less stable by portage. This makes these |
7 |
> > submissions automatically visible and easy to install for those who care, |
8 |
> > but retains them invisible (and perhaps even unfetchable) for those who |
9 |
> > dont). |
10 |
> > |
11 |
> > While there was support behind it, there was an opposition as well. One |
12 |
> > real and I think most important objection is along the lines 'do we |
13 |
> > really want to stress our servers by all these "unsupported" ebuilds?' |
14 |
> |
15 |
> I think that's a non-issue and certainly not the main argument against |
16 |
> it. It's more about ensuring quality of the distro as a whole, where do |
17 |
> you put the line of what is Gentoo and what is not, what is supported |
18 |
> and what isn't. It all becomes a fuzzy area, maybe clear to our users or |
19 |
> not even all of them, certainly not the outside linux world. |
20 |
> |
21 |
> I don't expect newcomers to Gentoo/Linux that now happily use ~arch |
22 |
> because someone on IRC recommended it -while it really is meant as a |
23 |
> testing ground for experienced users, to help out the distro- to know |
24 |
> the difference between the different levels of Gentoo-ness or make a |
25 |
> conscience choice on what they want. They probably go for 'hey that's a |
26 |
> cool new alpha quality app on that screenie. Hey more cool, someone on |
27 |
> IRC says it's in the Gentoo user submitted ebuilds level, i'll make that |
28 |
> my default level from now on.', getting an unreliable distro in return. |
29 |
> This may be a bleak picture, but in a sense these things are already |
30 |
> happening. |
31 |
|
32 |
A little bit of a side issue, but this is actually seems to be quite a big |
33 |
problem. I'm a relative newbie to the IRC channels and haven't really seen it |
34 |
on the forums or mailing list, but the standard response to "I'm installing |
35 |
Gentoo for the first time - can you tell me what the best method is?" seems |
36 |
to be "2.6 kernel and ~arch" from two thirds of the respondents. I've even |
37 |
seen recommendations for breakmygentoo to a new user. Another one is "emerge |
38 |
says the digest is wrong - what should I do?" with the 'answer' being "run |
39 |
ebuild <ebuild> digest". |
40 |
|
41 |
Maybe something similar to Spider's recent developer-wide reprieve would be |
42 |
good in the GWN for the short-term. For the long-term, though, Gentoo "dos |
43 |
and donts" or, more to the point, "what Gentoo supports" really need to be |
44 |
explained to a new user from the beginning. Coming back to the topic, any |
45 |
'solution' that allows user-contributed ebuilds to bypass QA (and even |
46 |
breakmygentoo has minimal QA) needs to be thoroughly pre-advised too. |
47 |
|
48 |
-- |
49 |
Regards, |
50 |
Jason Stubbs |
51 |
|
52 |
-- |
53 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |