| 1 |
Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: |
| 2 |
> Let's not blatantly ignore our REAL problems. We can no longer afford |
| 3 |
> to maintain the status-quo of pedantic masturbatory discussions on the |
| 4 |
> finer points of ebuild formats. We cannot AFFORD to look the other way |
| 5 |
> while the distro rots away. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
What exactly is your proposal? Ban discussion of GLEP 55? I doubt less |
| 9 |
posts on GLEP 55 will mean more developers joining arch teams instead, |
| 10 |
or whatever. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
People work on the things they want to work on. If they want to work on |
| 13 |
EAPIs that is fine by me - that is forward progress. The solution to |
| 14 |
progress in one area and not another is not to stop the area that is |
| 15 |
moving forward. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Sure, if there were actual resource contention at stake that would make |
| 18 |
sense. However, if you tell a dev not to work on A but instead to work |
| 19 |
on B the most likely outcomes are that they'll: |
| 20 |
1. Work on A anyway. |
| 21 |
2. Start a separate project to work on A if you actively prevent them |
| 22 |
from doing so. |
| 23 |
3. Work on C, or D, or on nothing at all. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
At best they might give B a token effort. After all, if they wanted to |
| 26 |
work on B they would have done so in the first place. By all means |
| 27 |
advertise needs in case people aren't aware of them and find them |
| 28 |
interesting, but you can put a gun to people's heads and tell them what |
| 29 |
to do. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
If you want more people in the arch team start with the -user mailing |
| 32 |
list and take time to mentor somebody who is interested in maintaining |
| 33 |
packages as a dev. Or, if you'd rather donate money to a fund to offer |
| 34 |
to pay people to do maintenance. |
Archives