| 1 |
Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 2 |
> Here's another example of it done correctly. If you add a game to the |
| 3 |
> tree, the herd should be listed as games. Period. Even if you are |
| 4 |
> going to be the sole maintainer of the package, games should be the |
| 5 |
> herd. Why? Because it is a game, silly. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
There _is_ no requirement that a package must belong to a herd. It's very |
| 8 |
good advice, and it's good for Gentoo, but it's _not_ a requirement. I'm |
| 9 |
sorry, but I think in this case what you are asserting isn't correct. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Why does this matter? Why am I bringing this up? You are asking for the |
| 12 |
ability to 'opt out' of Project Sunrise, to decide that certain types of |
| 13 |
packages are not added to the Project Sunrise overlay; specifically, that |
| 14 |
games are not added to the Sunrise overlay. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
As I understand it, and I apologise if I'm wrong, these are packages that |
| 17 |
you (and your project) do not maintain at the moment - if you did, they |
| 18 |
would be in the tree. You have already strongly asserted in this thread how |
| 19 |
you feel about things needing to be in the tree. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
When I say I don't believe, I mean that I'm not aware of any Gentoo rule |
| 22 |
giving project leads any such dominion.I don't believe being the lead of any |
| 23 |
project (be it games, webapps, or anything else) gives _anyone_ the |
| 24 |
automatic right to suppress packages that you're not going to maintain - |
| 25 |
subject to the due diligence about dangerous packages and unmaintained |
| 26 |
packages that I mentioned earlier in this thread. I believe that this is a |
| 27 |
right that you are claiming for yourself; I'm sure you're doing so with good |
| 28 |
intentions. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
You've raised a lot of valid concerns about the plans of Project Sunrise, |
| 31 |
but here I think you're asking for too much, by trying to assert dominion |
| 32 |
over what simply isn't yours to control. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
It's reasonable (and existing Gentoo practice) to say "hands off - we |
| 35 |
maintain that package". |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
Saying "hands off, but we are not going to maintain that package either" ... |
| 38 |
it may be good for you, but I can't see how it's good for Gentoo - unless |
| 39 |
the package is dangerous. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Best regards, |
| 42 |
Stu |
| 43 |
-- |
| 44 |
Stuart Herbert stuart@g.o |
| 45 |
Gentoo Developer http://www.gentoo.org/ |
| 46 |
http://blog.stuartherbert.com/ |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
GnuPG key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu |
| 49 |
Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319 C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C |
| 50 |
-- |
Archives