| 1 |
On Thu, 2004-01-22 at 08:21, Jan Schubert wrote: |
| 2 |
> Jon Portnoy wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> >And millions of bug reports from users who don't realize they shouldn't |
| 5 |
> >report bugs to us on unofficial, unsupported ebuilds, plus users who |
| 6 |
> >don't realize Gentoo isn't responsible for any breakage, viruses, or |
| 7 |
> >whatever else propogated by an unofficial tree. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> Jon, what John meant is maybe something like to just allow "qualified" |
| 11 |
> non devs to support work in the unofficial tree. I'm quite sure that |
| 12 |
> these non devs feel very responsible for their work. There might be some |
| 13 |
> BugReports in the beginning, but they will be handled by the responsible |
| 14 |
> non dev. Maybe some of these non devs will become a dev in the future or |
| 15 |
> where asked to become a dev in the past but just don't have the time for |
| 16 |
> such a responsible job (personally this is half of the true for me - the |
| 17 |
> other half is that i'm feeling that i'm still in the progress of learning). |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> On the other side i believe, that users accessing this unofficial tree |
| 20 |
> know what they are doing, so it should'nt reflect the official devs that |
| 21 |
> much. In my understanding this "feature" is requested by people which |
| 22 |
> are not that happy with the current situation (some of them are these |
| 23 |
> non devs we talking about). All of them are aware of the consequences. |
| 24 |
> This tree would be completely out of scope for "normal" users (they most |
| 25 |
> likely never get in touch with this unofficial tree). |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
You forget about the real problem that we face, which is not the state |
| 28 |
of the ebuilds that are used which are of an "unofficial" nature, but |
| 29 |
rather the bugs we receive and requests for help from users whom have |
| 30 |
used these ebuilds and wish to reverse the problems they have caused. |
| 31 |
It really boils down to one thing. No matter what, ebuilds which are |
| 32 |
not in the tree are not verified by the development team and WILL at |
| 33 |
some point cause the development team some grief in attempting to |
| 34 |
recover from them. Yes, there are a good many absolutely perfect |
| 35 |
ebuilds submitted by people every day which never make it into portage. |
| 36 |
I am still a very strong believer that posting information to the bug |
| 37 |
which the ebuild has been attached is a much better idea than having any |
| 38 |
form of "unofficial" tree anywhere. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Of course, this isn't stopping anyone from having their own tree at |
| 41 |
all. After all, this is all about choice and freedom. You just can't |
| 42 |
expect us to give it any form of sanctioning, because it is simply more |
| 43 |
overhead that we cannot maintain. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
> Maybe all these mails are just a request for an "official" unofficial |
| 46 |
> tree!? The problem of lots of unsubmitted ebuilds in bugzilla has to be |
| 47 |
> adressed somehow. You should use the motiviatian and the added value |
| 48 |
> which these non devs would like to bring in. Don't offend them! |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
> Thx, |
| 51 |
> Jan |
| 52 |
> |
| 53 |
> PS: If someone of the non devs would ask me, i can say that i've found a |
| 54 |
> acceptable solution for my occasional activities: Just get a account for |
| 55 |
> any unofficial gentoo cvs tree and submitt your ebuilds there (and to |
| 56 |
> bugzilla also, of course). So you are able to maintain your ebuilds, get |
| 57 |
> familiar with repoman etc. and interessted people can use your ebuilds |
| 58 |
> by accessing this tree via PORTDIR_OVERLAY. |
| 59 |
> |
| 60 |
> |
| 61 |
> -- |
| 62 |
> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives