Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Jason Stubbs <jasonbstubbs@×××××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] creating ebuilds
Date: Sat, 10 Jan 2004 13:10:08
Message-Id: 200401102116.05008.jasonbstubbs@mailandnews.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] creating ebuilds by foser
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