| 1 |
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 04:10:36 +0200 |
| 2 |
Peter Stuge <peter@×××××.se> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Tom Wijsman wrote: |
| 5 |
> > There is an alternative solution here; and that is to bring reviewed |
| 6 |
> > versions of them to the Portage tree or official games repository, |
| 7 |
> > and honor their contributions. That is a win-win situation for both |
| 8 |
> > of you. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I'm afraid that's too naive. :\ |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Why? I'm afraid you have misread what I wrote; or, maybe we're not |
| 13 |
thinking on the same wave length about this. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Gentoo Developers already do this work constantly; when they bring in |
| 16 |
new ebuilds from Bugzilla, review proxied maintainer's work, ... |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> I have significant experience from contributors in several other |
| 19 |
> projects who aren't interested in higher quality standards than |
| 20 |
> their own. They will infallably find a way to continue their work |
| 21 |
> as they see fit, with the case in point being gamerlay. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
I do not state that they are or should be interested. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
My alternative solution doesn't have to involve contributor interaction. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> Someone interested in maintaining higher standards will need to |
| 28 |
> maintain such higher standards on their own, experience shows that |
| 29 |
> zero percent of that effort is absorbed by those contributors who are |
| 30 |
> content with lower standards - they more or less explicitly state |
| 31 |
> that they do not want to learn how to attain higher quality. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
That's what I was suggesting: Use their work honoring them; but, do not |
| 34 |
give them back reviews or feedback as they don't want that. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
> Unless one has actually been in this position I think it may be |
| 37 |
> difficult to understand how extremely demotivating it is to keep |
| 38 |
> cleaning up after people who do not want to learn. It is neither |
| 39 |
> sustainable for a single person nor for a team. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
I feel the opposite, it is often easier to start from ebuilds that |
| 42 |
already work than to start from those that don't; as at that point you |
| 43 |
only need to apply testing and QA practices. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Whereas otherwise you would need to reinvent the wheel, what others |
| 46 |
have already done before you. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
This is at least how others and I handle ebuilds and patches that are |
| 49 |
provided; but yes, I also see people that rather start from scratch. |
| 50 |
It's kind of a personal opinion thing, and I believe both approaches |
| 51 |
are a good way; the existence of one shouldn't exclude the other... |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
> If there's infrastructure to support it I'm strongly in favor of |
| 54 |
> letting everyone do what they like to do, a sort of live and let |
| 55 |
> live. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
There's always going to be so; eg. GitHub, but even with the existence |
| 58 |
of such infrastructure we actually won't need it, because the gamerlay |
| 59 |
project is backed by Gentoo Developers so I doubt there will be |
| 60 |
deprecation of it any time soon. Indeed, let it live. |
| 61 |
|
| 62 |
> The question is why high quality would matter. |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
It does for the Portage tree or official overlays that intend to deal |
| 65 |
with quite a large audience, it doesn't have to be so for gamerlay. |
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
-- |
| 68 |
With kind regards, |
| 69 |
|
| 70 |
Tom Wijsman (TomWij) |
| 71 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 72 |
|
| 73 |
E-mail address : TomWij@g.o |
| 74 |
GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D |
| 75 |
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D |
Archives