1 |
On Mon January 05 2004 11:36 pm, Allen Parker wrote: |
2 |
<snip> |
3 |
|
4 |
> Basically, I just find that the entire ebuild submission process could |
5 |
> definitely be streamlined as to take less dev time and be more rewarding |
6 |
> for the users actually doing the submissions. Including having user |
7 |
> response saying, "hey, so and so just bumped package-x.y.y to package-x.y.z |
8 |
> and it builds fine with a renamed and digested ebuild." |
9 |
|
10 |
I couldn't agree more. After all whats the ARCH for anyway if it's not really |
11 |
being used. My contributions in the past have been along the lines and |
12 |
compiling and testing and summiting info. I've got 7 systems to crunch with |
13 |
and they all use distcc. So testing and submitting bug reports to |
14 |
bugs.gentoo.org, kde.org, openoffice.org, etc has been my way of |
15 |
contributing. Now I've devoted 3 of my best systems to get really serious |
16 |
about giving back even more. |
17 |
|
18 |
But I want to know if the brick wall that others have hit is still there or |
19 |
not. There's been a bit o conflict in teh past where gentoo will call for |
20 |
maintainers for certain projects yet previously slapped down up and coming |
21 |
devs that want to maintain a different project. Why would they volunteer for |
22 |
the requested project after being hammered previously even if they have the |
23 |
skill to do the requested one? Would you? Who would? From my understanding |
24 |
the devs are overwhelmed right now with maintaining the current tree and need |
25 |
more people to take on maintaining packages. The egos need to go by by and |
26 |
just do a quick check to see if the ebuild and the dev have followed policy |
27 |
and mark the thing ~x86 or whatever arch it is and toss it out. If it floats |
28 |
then great they've proven themselves. If it sinks then a bit more education |
29 |
is in order, pull the package and politely ask the new dev to find and fix |
30 |
the problem and describe clearly what the problem was and what they did to |
31 |
fix it and if it apears they understand the problem and had a good solution |
32 |
toss it back in the tree to go again. It would likely float the second time. |
33 |
|
34 |
I'm not suggesting giving someone new with no established background any sort |
35 |
of access. What I'm suggesting is basically what Allen spoke of in just |
36 |
encouraging more contributions but accepting ebuilds faster and the person |
37 |
with the proper access toss it in the tree. |
38 |
|
39 |
Robert |
40 |
|
41 |
-- |
42 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |