| 1 |
And again, we have the same situation that lead to my resignation: |
| 2 |
People who have absolutely no clue of how releng works scream. Not about |
| 3 |
"BAD QA!!!11" this time, but about a decision that was made to make work |
| 4 |
easier. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
What is wrong with you, guys? You all have so good and enlightening |
| 7 |
ideas! Why does nobody want to be my successor? Come on - my footprints |
| 8 |
aren't that big! |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Seriously, the reaction of some developers and users smells a bit like |
| 11 |
Slashdot to me: "OMG! They are removing the 133735t part of gent00!!!". |
| 12 |
Sounds silly, right? Those people that read the install-docs *carefully* |
| 13 |
are the only ones being r e a d y to do a stage1-install. If they read |
| 14 |
carefully they will see the link "Hey, you can still do stage1 - if you |
| 15 |
want to then read-on over here". |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
With some exceptions, most of the people replying to this thread |
| 18 |
obviously have no clue what tracking down a bug in a stage1 installation |
| 19 |
means: It's a lottery - especially if the user has nearly no knowledge |
| 20 |
of the backgrounds and can only tell you: "!!! ERROR in foo/bar-0.8.15". |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I'd like all of you to keep this in mind. Gentoo isn't a |
| 23 |
garage-distribution anymore and I tend to say (though I don't know the |
| 24 |
exact number of received mails) that those who complained at www@ didn't |
| 25 |
read the whole story about the "removal" and are really a minority. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Also, why a GLEP for that? A GLEP for removing something from the |
| 28 |
handbook? Wow! Bureaucracy-wise Gentoo seems to get more and more |
| 29 |
european. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Regards |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Benjamin "beejay, the former x86-monkey" Judas |
Archives