1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
3 |
|
4 |
Caleb Cushing wrote: |
5 |
>> Bugzilla is a tool for developers to track progress, not for |
6 |
>> third-party distributions to track progress. You've forked the tree. |
7 |
>> That's fine. The license allows that. But it doesn't obligate us to |
8 |
>> adapt our tools to fit your purpose. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> I've done lots of version bump bugs over the years. my reasons for |
11 |
> doing so may have changed. But the general process has not. Does it |
12 |
> matter if I've forked? doesn't the package still need an update? |
13 |
|
14 |
I think a lot (most?) of us agree that bugs shouldn't be closed until fixes hit |
15 |
the main tree. But it indeed does not matter that you've forked, so you |
16 |
shouldn't even have brought it up on the bug report. Bugs aren't a good way to |
17 |
keep in touch with developers, that's what irc is for. |
18 |
|
19 |
>> Your behavior on bug 260582 was clearly unacceptable. You |
20 |
>> seem to think that we owe you something. Please re-examine your |
21 |
>> premises. Donnie already told you he was working on it. Our job is not |
22 |
>> to support your distribution. It is to make the best distro for |
23 |
>> ourselves. In the case of xorg-server, that means getting something |
24 |
>> into the tree that works. A masked ebuild will in this case be more |
25 |
>> bother than it's worth because the mask would have to encompass a |
26 |
>> bunch of other packages. Which leads me on to the next paragraph... |
27 |
> |
28 |
> this and all the cases given are examples, and perhaps my behavior was |
29 |
> unacceptable. But I think the response to my bug was too. No gentoo |
30 |
> doesn't owe me or regen2, a thing. It might, however, owe users |
31 |
> something. I agree on committing ebuilds that work, that doesn't mean |
32 |
> I don't have the right to open a bug and watch for progress reports. |
33 |
|
34 |
No, you don't have that right. It's just how it usually works and how it should |
35 |
work IMO, but that doesn't entitle you to it. |
36 |
|
37 |
>> In many cases that's true, but on average, the QA of the tree is much |
38 |
>> better than overlays. |
39 |
> |
40 |
> I couldn't say... I suppose I agree yes on most overlays, but a few |
41 |
> are supposed to be more 'exceptional'. the biggest problem is the bugs |
42 |
> that result between ebuilds in the tree and those of overlays. like |
43 |
> one I filed on virtual/perl-Mime-Base64. or like how inkscape won't |
44 |
> build against 5.10, except with patches already in bugzilla, but both |
45 |
> cases seemed to be one of 'perl 5.10 isn't in the tree so we won't |
46 |
> fix' I think they should put it in before 5.10 is in the tree. put |
47 |
> that's just me. |
48 |
|
49 |
And they probably will, but as perl-5.10 isn't in the tree, there is no rush. |
50 |
Either way, it's the perl team's decision to go with the patch in bugzilla or |
51 |
some other option and when they do it, whether they make that decision |
52 |
consciously or are forced into it due to real life time-constraints. |
53 |
|
54 |
>> We Need Git. It would really ease the workflow of accepting user |
55 |
>> contributions if users could just set up their own overlay and sent me |
56 |
>> an email asking to merge their changesets. |
57 |
> |
58 |
> git's great. but I've actually found 'merging' changesets to be a bad |
59 |
> idea from people. It can lead to some really sloppy commits, and |
60 |
> merging is a less stringent review than cherry-picking patches. |
61 |
|
62 |
I've found that git's patches aren't really what we want in the case of bumping. |
63 |
For bug reports we usually ask for a patch against the last ebuild in the tree. |
64 |
Is there perhaps a way to make git do that automatically? |
65 |
|
66 |
>> You could |
67 |
>> have made thousands of commits already, fixing a substantial amount of |
68 |
>> the problems you've raised. |
69 |
> |
70 |
> thousands seem like a high number. I think I've been pushing an |
71 |
> average one 1 patch per day since january to the tree (my tree). |
72 |
> *laughing* I'm still the #1 contributor of git patches to funtoo. |
73 |
|
74 |
It's great that people are doing their own thing, but to get it into OUR tree it |
75 |
will need to be comitted to OUR tree by someone who has access to OUR tree. |
76 |
Patches are great, but commits are better. |
77 |
|
78 |
>> This isn't a quick fix. |
79 |
> |
80 |
>> You'll have to work with people and |
81 |
>> that can sometimes be frustrating. |
82 |
> |
83 |
> I already have to 'work' with these people, the difference would be |
84 |
> what? how much respect I get? in gentoo land having @gentoo.org seems |
85 |
> to mean something... if you don't have that, you seem to |
86 |
> auto-magically get less respect, than you would if you did have it. |
87 |
|
88 |
Your demands because of your feelings of entitlement are what are costing you |
89 |
respect. |
90 |
|
91 |
>> But you'll get to be part of the |
92 |
>> development process and you'll get to work with the things you care |
93 |
>> about. |
94 |
> |
95 |
> you mean I'll be part of 'a' development process and work on some of |
96 |
> the things I care about. Obviously stepping on other developers toes |
97 |
> seems to be a taboo. |
98 |
|
99 |
Yes, it's extremely frowned upon to step on another developers toes; Gentoo is |
100 |
not a one-man show. Would you like ME to stomp all over your tree? Didn't think so. |
101 |
|
102 |
Just so we're clear. I really hope you change your attitude and take Peter |
103 |
Alfredsen (loki_val) up on his generous offer. |
104 |
|
105 |
Marijn |
106 |
|
107 |
- -- |
108 |
Sarcasm puts the iron in irony, cynicism the steel. |
109 |
|
110 |
Marijn Schouten (hkBst), Gentoo Lisp project, Gentoo ML |
111 |
<http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-{lisp,ml} on FreeNode |
112 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
113 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (GNU/Linux) |
114 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org |
115 |
|
116 |
iEYEARECAAYFAkmvsBoACgkQp/VmCx0OL2xGYQCfTcCXKZ7QOui0Btgkpj9AYBNt |
117 |
8lMAnRbnWBP5i7tAzFRy68PWjrKPvij8 |
118 |
=n+6Y |
119 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |