Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

[Daniel Campbell]

On 06/08/2016 08:53 AM, james wrote:
> On 06/08/2016 08:16 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> Friends,
>
> It would be wise of us to create a novel way of involving users from
> the ashes of Sunrise.
>
> Here is my suggestion: It would be fruitful to encourage every single
> Gentoo user to have their own repository. And this repository should
> be publicly available.
>
>> Folks can already do this on their own with github. Are you suggesting
>> individual githubs, under the 'gentoo umbrella'?
>
>
> This way we can merge useful things from people, and they can submit
> pull-requests if they have useful things that are not in the tree.
> Before merging anything to the main tree, ebuilds should of course be
> carefully reviewed. Users could also review each other's ebuilds to
> ensure better quality ebuilds.
>
>> In fact, users of gentoo learning to review ebuilds (from other users)
>> is a good idea, particularly more in the 'application' or 'area of
>> interest' as opposed core or gentoo-centric packages.
>
>
> This could lead to a future where the Gentoo tree is largely
> superseded. Every user would just have their own repository, where
> they could pick and choose packages from other users. The Gentoo tree
> would just focus on a high-quality repository of the basic/core things
> that everybody needs. Gentoo devs would spend most of their time
> maintaining curated small and useful repositories.
>
>> Sorry, I'm not buying into the 'utopia' scheme. The current gentoo::
>> user-->proxy-->dev pathway needs to become stronger. I your proposal as
>> complimenting that pathway, like this:: user-->strong_user-->proxy....
>> However, if/when utopia is achieved, sure I'll guzzle the koolaid.
>
>
> While there is some work to be done to facilitate my suggestion, it
> should be a lot less work than Sunrise was. What we need short-term is
> simply documentation where we encourage users to have their own
> repositories that are available online. Next up would be setting
> Portage up to expect a user repository from the get go. The initial
> personal tree could be fork of the Gentoo tree with a remote 'gentoo'
> that they can pull from (emerge could do this automatically). This
> way, users who do not care at all, can just use Gentoo like they do
> today.
>
>> Too much power too quickly. I'd suggest a user, with an area of interest
>> that is under-served as to their package needs (java, clusters, science,
>> etc) creates said github repo and starts cracking at packages. The
>> grandiose-ness you propose should only come upon graduating from proxy
>> school, imho. A dev actually can now get their own repo, via github, or
>> a group of devs can work out of the same repo, as self-defined as to
>> what works best.
>
>
>
> The final step is the most difficult (but then again we might never
> get so far). It is two-fold. First we make the core/base repository.
> Then we identify important subsets that can be logically separated
> into repositories, and do this.
>
>> Actually a different project, imho. Focus on strong-user-->proxy-->dev.
>
>
> Parallel to all this, we should work on tooling. It is unreasonable to
> expect people to be git experts to be effective. The workflows for
> managing user repositories doesn't need the full power of git anyway.
> It would also be good to offer hosting insofar as possible to a set of
> curated repositories we consider to be of high quality.
>
>> Now you have just joined my chorus. Gentooers, are pretty much 'flung
>> against the git-wall'. There is a gentoo way, but nobody of sufficient
>> knowledge depth cares to create such tools and docs. It's not easy.
>> Examples == {null set}.
>
>> Some have been revising the devManual, just to bring it current with all
>> the  changes. That is a challenging effort, because, the dev-manual is
>> where the dev community must agree.  There needs to be a proxy manual
>> and development materials (I personally hate IRC as it is often ADD-noise).
>
>> Proper docs take a while to develop and even more effort to maintain.
>
> In the end, Gentoo might make a gigantic leap into the future with a
> truly modular distribution. If anyone wants to look at distros that
> get this more right than Gentoo, have a look at e.g. NixOS and Exherbo.
>
>
>> If you agree with loosing the more grandiose ideas (for now) from above,
>> I'll work with you as a test-grunt on developing documents and pathway
>> training, on a modular basis following  the
>> user-->strong-users-->proxy-->dev pathway.
>
>> I guess to sum it up, WE, work together via emails (create first draft
>> docs from emails), set up a github account, learn the necessary
>> specifics of  github-gentoo-kungfu, create manuals (several revisions of
>> these new docs) and such so I can successfully graduate (pass the ebuild
>> and postmortemproxy quizes) and become a candidate for dev status,
>> without ever using IRC.
>
>> Note:: does not imply that I will apply for dev-status, or any
>> requirement to be accepted as a dev, but that I am recognized, via
>> accomplishments to @dev-status.
>
>> DEAL?
>
>> This means I create the cookbooks, (format?) based on our email
>> discourse, and you play editor/mentor until you think I'm ready for
>> dev-status. I'll have my own github (something on my todo list anyway).
>> I'd even like this document/pathway to seemlessly reference the new
>> gentoo devManual, frequently. If we are successful it means there will
>> be a (cook)book for self paced study for user==>dev, without the noise
>> of irc.
>
>
>> ps, I already completed the ebuild quiz and most of  the end-o-mentoring
>> quiz. The things not finished are in flux due to changes. Still, I have
>> holes in both my 'big picture comprehension of gentoo-bike-shedding,
>> git/github and general need to become a stronger coder (python).
>
>> INTERESTED?
>> James
>
>
I can't say I disagree with you on tooling. The switch to git alone has
greatly helped and improved Gentoo, though. I like the idea of a clear
pathway to developer status. It wasn't so clear when I was working
toward it. The proxy-maint team is doing a great job at promoting their
project and it seems to have gotten some decent attention. I posit that
they put their two cents in on this sort of stuff, since they'd be the
ones dealing with the fallout from any higher decisions.

Proxy-maint team: do you guys feel that your project and/or process are
a suitable starting point to becoming a proper Gentoo developer?

I'm not sure what the problem with IRC is. In the context of your
quizzes, it's important that the interviews take place in real-time. It
allows a quick method of communication. It's informal, aims to be
friendly and helpful, and tests your ability to find answers on your own
in a somewhat quicker fashion. Even if you, as a dev, have little
interest in IRC or helping out in the #gentoo channel, the interview
process is valuable and will help you get faster at finding answers.

I remember questioning the value of the process. Why we needed tests,
why I needed a mentor and a recruiter, why this and that, etc. The
reason is there are many things in play that are being tested.
Recruiters need to hone their "dev sense" in finding people that will be
a good fit for the Gentoo culture. Mentors are essentially teachers, and
that comes with an entirely different skill set. They have to work
together to guide the candidate to a place where they can competently
find their way. The live interview is to make sure everyone's on the
same page; if not, then you get instant feedback and know exactly what
you need to work on. It's valuable; at least it was to me...

That said, I can get aboard the idea of improving the process. But like
any other FOSS effort, it's powered by volunteers and Gentoo has a
chronic problem with manpower. Even after becoming a developer, you'll
need to get infra involved to setup your LDAP and e-mail, make sure
everything looks okay and works, etc. The gentoo-keys team will work
with you to create a GLEP-63-compliant key so your work can be trusted,
and so on. So anything we do to improve the process will need to have
input from all the 'steps' and make sure the important things are
covered. Expedience means nothing if we gloss over important details.

It sounds corny but when you join Gentoo it's not just a pat on the back
and "welcome to the team, the beer's over there, let's get coding".
You're joining an entire community of people from around the world who
are working together to build not only a distribution, but build the
people who comprise it, too. It's a real investment on behalf of both
the candidate and the distro itself. It's why we only want people who
are serious about being a developer instead of treating it like a
checkmark on a resume.

(Other devs are free to correct any of the above, but that's what I've
gotten out of becoming a developer)

If you're looking to be recognized and serve your ego, every developer
gets a developer bug and an announcement on gentoo-project.

Whatever you end up doing, I wish you luck in the process. Don't let a
few live IRC interviews keep you from contributing or joining our ranks.
There are plenty of devs I don't see on IRC, and plenty more who almost
never post on the ML. They do their work quietly and slip under the
radar. They're no less worthy of thanks.

Just my 2¢.
-- 
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C  1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6