| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Seemant Kulleen wrote: |
| 5 |
> On Sun, 2006-07-30 at 23:50 -0400, Brett I. Holcomb wrote: |
| 6 |
>> My concern is beyond me. As I stated I know enough about what to expect IF I |
| 7 |
>> use sunrise. But many do not and with it becoming official people figure |
| 8 |
>> it's gentoo and when it breaks Gentoo suffers. Gentoo has a reputation as a |
| 9 |
>> good solid, stable distro. As user and big fan of Gentoo I'm concerned - why |
| 10 |
>> couldn't sunrise have stayed unoffical like BMG. Why does it have to be |
| 11 |
>> official? Gentoo can choose to do what it feels is right and I will do the |
| 12 |
>> same. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
It has just to be put clear that in this case "official" doesn't mean |
| 15 |
"solid", "right", "tested by our best QA", but simply "preferred". That |
| 16 |
is, I think we're not speaking of "official", but "_basically_ revised" |
| 17 |
and "encouraged". |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Many users (and I'm both a dev *and* a user) just could do much for |
| 20 |
Gentoo, but when you're interested in a niche sector package, you *don't |
| 21 |
have other choices* but |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
1) an endless wait for an open bug |
| 24 |
2) becoming dev for the good of all :-) |
| 25 |
3) just use your personal overlay, without sharing the results of your |
| 26 |
efforts. If the bug in 1) is still open, why updating it with your |
| 27 |
latest patches/revision bumps? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Statistically you end up to 3). We just need something to reduce this |
| 30 |
"statistically". |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> BMG has, from day 1, been marginalised in the Gentoo community. I |
| 33 |
> always fancied that they should've been folded into the larger Gentoo |
| 34 |
> projects and become what Sunrise is today. The way I read you, your |
| 35 |
> fear is based on the possibility of some future perception by an unknown |
| 36 |
> number of people. Sunrise's idea is that stuff gets checked and |
| 37 |
> re-checked and remains accessible -- have you read through their site |
| 38 |
> and their commit histories and changesets? They're not exactly |
| 39 |
> dawdling. |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> As for Gentoo's reputation, I'm actually pleasantly surprised to hear it |
| 42 |
> characterised that way :) If it has that reputation, then it will |
| 43 |
> actually take a lot to break that. I'm surprised that ~keywords didn't |
| 44 |
> already break it. I agree that the official portage tree is a QA |
| 45 |
> nightmare. Sunrise seems to be nipping that nightmare for a future date |
| 46 |
> -- ie by allowing people to commit and perform peer reviews, they're |
| 47 |
> grooming the next generation of developers to look at QA from the |
| 48 |
> outset, instead of as an afterthought. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
I'm just adding another good point to sunrise (or whatever will be a |
| 51 |
revised "preferred centralized repo of packages not officially |
| 52 |
supported"): you have another way to benefit of retired devs who just |
| 53 |
don't have the time to be responsible for the bugs of a package in an |
| 54 |
arch they don't know, but have the interest and the competence to add |
| 55 |
packages to an unofficial overlay. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
I'll be soon one of those devs: maybe some of the packages I maintain |
| 58 |
will finish as "maintainer-wanted". And, in this case, they could |
| 59 |
eventually end up in the sunrise overlay: a way for the users to help users. |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
Just my 2 euro c |
| 63 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 64 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) |
| 65 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org |
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
iD8DBQFEzeL5xrlkonpN2woRAgR6AKCZ95pvY5BCaaHfkDeU0bXhsn3/ngCfWCTa |
| 68 |
QTpQ3b2LvCnENAWdTSZx5Ng= |
| 69 |
=GTM7 |
| 70 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 71 |
-- |
| 72 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives