| 1 |
On 04/17/2015 11:09 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: |
| 2 |
> Am Donnerstag, 16. April 2015, 19:27:13 schrieb hasufell: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> High-quality overlays are the easiest way to contribute. I don't think |
| 5 |
>> users should really have to care when or how an ebuild reaches the CVS |
| 6 |
>> gentoo tree. Most projects already use overlays (e.g. science, perl, |
| 7 |
>> haskell...). Start there and you'll save a lot of headache too. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> * No offense to those involved there intended, but I'm pretty sure that overall QA standards in the main tree are higher than in the sci overlay at least. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Hm. That really depends on the maintainers. I've repeatedly seen utterly |
| 13 |
broken ebuilds in the tree that have lower quality than most user overlays. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
It's hard to say something about the QA standards of the tree, because |
| 16 |
there is no consistent workflow. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> Project overlays are typically used as staging ground for packages "in preparation" or "not yet ready for the end user". I am still not sure why you are trying to forcefully mix up this distinction. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Project overlays are not just used as staging ground, but also for user |
| 22 |
contributions. I don't think I am mixing up anything here and I was |
| 23 |
talking about "high-quality" overlays in general. I don't really care if |
| 24 |
it's run by a gentoo project when I contribute. |
Archives