1 |
On Tue, 24 Jan 2006 13:32:00 -0800 |
2 |
Donnie Berkholz <spyderous@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> Mark Loeser wrote: |
5 |
> >>> On Mon, 23 Jan 2006 23:06:12 -0800 Donnie Berkholz |
6 |
> >>> <spyderous@g.o> wrote: |
7 |
> >>> What's wrong with the original idea of just making any unported |
8 |
> >>> ebuild pull in all of modular X (minus drivers)? Yes, it means |
9 |
> >>> that some people will pick up unnecessary deps until all packages |
10 |
> >>> are ported, but it avoids anyone having to see flashy red errors. |
11 |
> >> The problem with that is that it removes all motivation to ever |
12 |
> >> port the packages. They'll just stay that way forever, where |
13 |
> >> forever means "until I threaten to remove that from the virtual," |
14 |
> >> in which case we'll be in the same scenario we are now. Why? |
15 |
> >> Because people have better things to do than fix stuff that isn't |
16 |
> >> broken. |
17 |
> > |
18 |
> > It'd be nice if you reconsidered this as it will minimize any |
19 |
> > breakage that may occur. Knowing that >800 packages are broken, |
20 |
> > and going to unmask it knowing that just doesn't seem acceptable in |
21 |
> > my eyes. ~arch isn't meant to be "things are known to be broken." |
22 |
> > It's meant to mean, we think all of this is ready to be stable, |
23 |
> > which it certainly won't be in this case. |
24 |
> |
25 |
> No, it won't. It will just postpone the same breakage, as I said |
26 |
> above. You haven't provided any logic or backup to your contrary |
27 |
> statement, just said that somehow a large portion of the other 800 |
28 |
> will magically get ported. |
29 |
> |
30 |
> Let me break this down again: of that 800, about 250 are unmaintained |
31 |
> packages according to metadata.xml or lack thereof. About 200 are |
32 |
> games. About 150 more belong to largely inactive herds. That's |
33 |
> roughly 600 that we already know will not get ported in a timely |
34 |
> fashion, if left to their maintainers, all because of lack of |
35 |
> manpower. What do you propose to deal with them? All I've heard |
36 |
> besides mine is proposals that delay the same breakage, not actually |
37 |
> get anything fixed. |
38 |
|
39 |
How about delaying it as long as n packages are ported per day? Kinda |
40 |
stupid idea, but it ensures that things won't get hold up due to |
41 |
unmaintained packages/inactive devs and might even speed the process up |
42 |
(that's an illusion probably). |
43 |
|
44 |
Marius |
45 |
|
46 |
-- |
47 |
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub |
48 |
|
49 |
In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be |
50 |
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better. |