1 |
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> * Portage. Gentoo hasn't delivered anything useful or cool for two |
4 |
> years or so. Things like layman are merely workarounds for severe |
5 |
> Portage limitations (not a criticism of layman). Delivery to end users |
6 |
> is based around what's possible with Portage, not what people want or |
7 |
> need. In the mean time, managing a Gentoo system has become much more |
8 |
> complicated due to the increased number of packages on a typical system |
9 |
> and the increased requirements for the average user. Combined with |
10 |
> serious improvements in the competition, Gentoo's benefits are rapidly |
11 |
> diminishing. Until there's a general admission that Portage is severely |
12 |
> holding Gentoo back, anything delivered by Gentoo will be far below |
13 |
> what could really be done. |
14 |
|
15 |
Portage is being incrementally improved. I'm not trying to rag on the |
16 |
former or the current portage crew; certainly it moves slowly. Much of |
17 |
it needs rewriting; my preference is to have more tests so that when |
18 |
stuff gets rewritten people aren't completly ruining the existing |
19 |
system, so my focus has been on tests and docs. Occasionally I work on |
20 |
features (glep 42 was one of those). People are free to submit patches |
21 |
and I think the portage team^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Zac does a decent job of |
22 |
integrating them. The only recent one that didn't get applied was the |
23 |
parallelization one; and I think zmedico has some plans for how he wants |
24 |
to accomplish that. |
25 |
|
26 |
> |
27 |
> It's been claimed that Gentoo lacks direction. It's more accurate to |
28 |
> say that the inability to change Portage prevents Gentoo from going |
29 |
> anywhere. That small interface improvements can be passed off as a big |
30 |
> deal and that users get excited over minor config file tweaks is |
31 |
> indicative of how low people's expectations really are. |
32 |
> |
33 |
|
34 |
The portage team has always been hesitant to break backwards |
35 |
compatibility; the advantage of competing programs such as your own |
36 |
(paludis) and pkgcore is that you don't have the whole of Gentoo's |
37 |
user-base and you can remain much more agile in that type of space. |
38 |
|
39 |
I also think either you are ignoring the changes or you are just unaware |
40 |
of things that the portage team (aka Zac for the most part ;)) has been |
41 |
working on. Many of these things are internal behind the scenes changes |
42 |
and they don't require any user-level modification. |
43 |
|
44 |
> * Similarly, the belief that Portage defines Gentoo and represents a |
45 |
> lot of work. The tree defines Gentoo, and contains far more code than a |
46 |
> mere package manager. |
47 |
> |
48 |
|
49 |
I agree with that statement. |
50 |
|
51 |
> * Low QA expectations. Gentoo's QA isn't any worse than it was two |
52 |
> years ago. However, expectations are much higher due to improvements in |
53 |
> other distributions, and the increase in tree complexity makes |
54 |
> mistakes much more severe. |
55 |
> |
56 |
> Mistakes can be classified as those that can be detected automatically |
57 |
> (things are improving in this area -- for one example, adjutrix is being |
58 |
> used to detect forced downgrades), and those that can't. Reducing the |
59 |
> latter involves education and ensuring that developers are aware of |
60 |
> expectations -- developers shouldn't be relying upon the QA team to do |
61 |
> QA. |
62 |
> |
63 |
> Unfortunately, some developers simply won't fix QA mistakes. When |
64 |
> something like this happens: |
65 |
> |
66 |
> 11:16:24 <@genstef> hansmi: bah fix your qa stuff yourself if you think |
67 |
> I am wrong. I wont do something I dont agree with |
68 |
> |
69 |
> something has to be done to prevent the developer in question from |
70 |
> continuing to hurt the users. |
71 |
> |
72 |
|
73 |
I can agree with parts of your statement. Particularly the expectations |
74 |
are not set out anywhere (not even by the QA team). There are no |
75 |
metrics, no data; it does not surprise me when QA is lax. There is QA |
76 |
policy of course (devmanual and devrel docs) but most of that relies on |
77 |
common sense (when is breaking the rules ok, when is it not, etc...) I |
78 |
said the same thing when Halcy0n led QA; if all the devs can't agree on |
79 |
the expectations of Quality Assurance within Gentoo there is no point in |
80 |
enforcing much of anything (aside from what I would term; black/white QA |
81 |
violations; ie no one in their right mind would think it wasn't a |
82 |
violation). However many violations are in a gray area in between and |
83 |
thus enforcement as well is...gray and not well executed. |
84 |
|
85 |
I would like to also point out that your quoted irc snippet is very weak |
86 |
as there is no explanation to what the issue is nor why genstef is being |
87 |
bothered about it. I realize you most likely meant it as an example of |
88 |
something that often happens (ie dev A does something, dev B calls him |
89 |
on it, dev A and dev B disagree on what proper course of action is; one |
90 |
dev must then have the bigger balls to either revert/fix or back down), |
91 |
however it may be good to use a made up instance in the future; lest |
92 |
your statement be misconstrued. |
93 |
|
94 |
|
95 |
> * The wrong idea of what the user base is, and what the target user |
96 |
> base is. Gentoo's direction is too heavily influenced by a small number |
97 |
> of extremely noisy ricer forum users, many of whom don't even run |
98 |
> Gentoo. Unfortunately, this self-perpetuating clique wields huge |
99 |
> amounts of influence. |
100 |
> |
101 |
|
102 |
I was certain that Gentoo's direction was influenced by the people |
103 |
working on Gentoo; not ricers. Do you have any examples of when the |
104 |
ricers changed the direction of things in Gentoo. |
105 |
|
106 |
> * The repeated abuse of silly phrases like "Gentoo is about choice", |
107 |
> "Gentoo is about the community" and "Gentoo should be about fun" to |
108 |
> attempt to rationalise insane policy decisions. Choice, community and |
109 |
> fun are all very well, but without a quality distribution they're |
110 |
> worthless. The primary goal should be a good distribution, with the |
111 |
> rest as things that come about as a result. |
112 |
> |
113 |
|
114 |
See I tend to disagree somewhat here. Quality is good, I don't think |
115 |
anyone will argue against that (I mean how could you!). However I don't |
116 |
think quality comes from frustrated developers. I believe that keeping |
117 |
developers happy and sane (ergo having fun) has a positive affect on |
118 |
quality. I also think that our community (both users and devs) is |
119 |
probably our best asset. I think sacrificing that great community for |
120 |
quality is a mistake. Luckily quality and community generally aren't at |
121 |
odds most of the time. |
122 |
|
123 |
> * Finally, of course, the widespread refusal to accept what the real |
124 |
> problems are, when it's much easier to blame everything upon a few |
125 |
> people or groups. It might be nice and easy to think that Saddam has |
126 |
> weapons of mass destruction and is secretly harbouring Bin Laden, |
127 |
> particularly when a few disreputable news channels are going around |
128 |
> saying it's true, but we all know how acting upon such delusions works |
129 |
> out... |
130 |
> |
131 |
|
132 |
I could have a counterargument and say that you refuse to accept what |
133 |
the real problem is and instead blame the portage developers and the set |
134 |
of developers with poor QA habits; aka I think this is a bad argument |
135 |
because one would have to agree on the problems to acknowledge them. |
136 |
|
137 |
I think many people believe your involvement is a big problem and that |
138 |
is unfortunate; however the fact that you seem to continue in the same |
139 |
mannerisms without acknowledging that maybe you actually have negative |
140 |
social impact here...I think that is a bit hypocritical. If projects |
141 |
within Gentoo can make an attempt to evaluate themselves and their |
142 |
affects on this mess; I think one person can do the same. |
143 |
|
144 |
-Alec |
145 |
-- |
146 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |