Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [ANNOUNCE] Project Sunrise - Gentoo User Overlay
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 16:41:15
Message-Id: 1149784067.19443.56.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: [ANNOUNCE] Project Sunrise - Gentoo User Overlay by Stefan Schweizer
1 On Thu, 2006-06-08 at 17:29 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
2 > Jon Portnoy wrote:
3 >
4 > > On Thu, Jun 08, 2006 at 09:32:13AM -0400, Thomas Cort wrote:
5 > >> On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 09:20:18 -0400
6 > >> Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o> wrote:
7 > >> > Please keep the games bugs in bugzilla. Making this change is a direct
8 > >> > change in games team policy without any prior notice to the games team
9 > >> > and without our permission.
10 >
11 > We have good instructions on our trac wiki page[1] for how to work with the
12 > overlay. The bottom of the page, point 6) adresses your problem.
13
14 Not really. You've taken what was a simple and open way of addressing
15 ebuild requests, and turned it into a closed forum. With a bug, anyone
16 with a bugzilla account can *contribute* anything that they want, and it
17 is all peer-reviewed. With this overlay, only people that are given
18 access will be allowed to contribute anything. Also, who is going to
19 control access to this resource? Why *is* there access controls? I
20 know that I'm going to hear "security" as a response, but it is a false
21 one. We already had a completely open resource where any of our users
22 can contribute any ebuilds that they want. You've created a more
23 restrictive and less useful version of this and increased the workload
24 on any developers whose packages are affected, such as the games team
25 with the inclusion of xmoto, which has been rejected in its current
26 state, and knights, which is currently in the tree *and* maintained.
27
28 > > I do not object to the concept of ebuilds in overlays.
29 > >
30 > > I do very much object to using any gentoo.org infrastructure or
31 > > subdomains to do so. If someone is going to tackle that, it should be
32 > > done outside of Gentoo proper. We don't need to be stuck maintaining and
33 > > supporting a semiofficial overlay.
34 >
35 > This is a problem, that we are working on, see [2]
36 > It is obvioous to see if an ebuild comes from an overlay or not with that
37 > change. Due to the good metastructure and project support in gentoo it is
38 > possible to have most of the overlay-work done in the projects [3] and [4]
39 >
40 > [1] http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/sunrise
41 > [2] http://bugs.gentoo.org/136031
42 > [PATCH] Display a warning when an overlay-ebuild fails
43 > [3] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/overlays
44 > [4] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/overlays/sunrise
45 >
46 > I am still against the idea of turning this into a flamewar. Better no
47 > comments than flaming comments. Please - keep it constructive.
48
49 Nobody has turned this into a flame war. We are trying to provide
50 constructive comments. Just because a comment points out ways why this
51 is a bad idea doesn't make it a flame.
52
53 The only thing that bothers me is the fact that this was done and is
54 something that was explicitly stated would not happen with the overlays
55 project. We now have a semi-official secondary repository, run by a
56 small group of developers, allowed to touch *any* package in the tree
57 however they see fit, whether it goes against the policies of the
58 package's maintainers or not. I'm sorry, but this is not in the spirit
59 of cooperation and working together so much as it is in the spirit of
60 doing what you want, policies be damned.
61
62 Were this limited *solely* to packages that need maintainers, I would
63 have less of a problem than it being used, as it is currently, to
64 explicitly work outside of the policies of established projects. As I
65 stated several times to you now when you brought up the idea of a games
66 overlay just so you could maintain packages how you wanted, you're more
67 than willing to keep packages that belong under the games herd in a
68 personal *developer* overlay. However, what you've done here is said
69 that you're more important than the established practices of another
70 project, and blatantly disregarded their policies, establishing a
71 "project" that gives you free reign to do whatever you wish.
72
73 Does anyone else see this as a problem?
74
75 --
76 Chris Gianelloni
77 Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
78 x86 Architecture Team
79 Games - Developer
80 Gentoo Linux

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [ANNOUNCE] Project Sunrise - Gentoo User Overlay Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@g.o>