1 |
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 06:47:27 -0400, Richard Freeman <rich0@g.o> |
2 |
wrote: |
3 |
> Jesús Guerrero wrote: |
4 |
>> |
5 |
>> Most Gentoo users will have no problem to use overlays as they need |
6 |
>> them. If we had more developers we could as maintain more packages, |
7 |
>> as simple as that. |
8 |
>> |
9 |
> |
10 |
> I actually tend to agree with this position, |
11 |
|
12 |
It's not something to agree or disagree. There aren't developers to |
13 |
maintain |
14 |
all the software under the sun, period. |
15 |
|
16 |
> however to use overlays as |
17 |
> a valid solution for end-users we need to do more to support them. |
18 |
|
19 |
Yeah, devs for that as well. |
20 |
|
21 |
> Right now it is at least a little painful to get set up with an overlay. |
22 |
|
23 |
|
24 |
No, it's a matter of using layman -a <whatever> |
25 |
|
26 |
> There also isn't really any official place to vet overlays, and there |
27 |
> isn't any official source for overlays that aren't maintained by gentoo. |
28 |
> |
29 |
> Sure, overlays.g.o has tons of overlays - but which ones are |
30 |
> mostly-stable, and which ones are intended to break systems? What is |
31 |
> the QA policy for each overlay? If I'm an end-user not interested in |
32 |
> breaking my system, what overlays are safe for me to use? |
33 |
|
34 |
There's no policy. Just like unofficial repos for any other distro. |
35 |
We can't control that. It's outside Gentoo. |
36 |
|
37 |
While I agree that having more packages and being more up to date is |
38 |
a good thing, I can never agree that we should sacrifice Gentoo for that. |
39 |
You want stability for what I see on your answer, well, that's what you |
40 |
have. I don't think we can do any more with the number of developers we |
41 |
have right now unless we start dumping blindingly and without any check |
42 |
every ebuild that we get across. |
43 |
|
44 |
-- |
45 |
Jesús Guerrero |