| 1 |
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 22:19:14 -0400 Luis Francisco Araujo <araujo@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> the developers could let all these three points at the hands of the |
| 4 |
> user wanting to get the ebuild included into the tree. |
| 5 |
[...] |
| 6 |
> The user has to compromise to take care of those previous commented |
| 7 |
> three points that some of us might be afraid of, besides of giving |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
Oh, if I can speak for me as a user I'll not like it. One of the major |
| 10 |
advantage of Gentoo is easy maintenace (not mindless, but easy if you |
| 11 |
know what you are doing) thanks to portage system. Another is |
| 12 |
availability of large number of software in distribution. These two |
| 13 |
together gives easily maintanable operating system - because of |
| 14 |
portage and because I do not need to maintain lot of packages by |
| 15 |
myself. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
If I have some application that is not included in portage why |
| 18 |
I decide to make an ebuild? Because I hope that then it will be |
| 19 |
accepted and included to portage, so maintained by developers (big |
| 20 |
thanks for this). If I have to take care of package + ebuild + |
| 21 |
dependencies, I'll rather choose not to make an ebulid but compile |
| 22 |
package right from .tar.gz archive. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Sorry for being such a bad user. But I'm pretty busy mostly so I'm |
| 25 |
glad If I find time to make an initial ebuild and submit. In that |
| 26 |
case, I see no problem to submit right to bugzilla and dicuss/fix/test |
| 27 |
the ebuild there. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
I would agree with your points of user responsibilty to solve bugs, |
| 30 |
dependencies and so on, but only until package is accepted and |
| 31 |
included to portage. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Robert |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
Robert Cernansky |
| 38 |
E-mail: hslists2@××××××.sk |
| 39 |
Jabber: HS@××××××.sk |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives