| 1 |
On 23/03/06, Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, 2006-03-23 at 14:41 +0000, Stuart Herbert wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Your nightmare scenario seems unavoidable. Enabling per-overlay bug |
| 4 |
> > tracking doesn't stop users posting bugs in bugzilla. It just causes |
| 5 |
> > confusion for users, because they're not sure where to go. Normally, |
| 6 |
> > it's not a problem - because the overlay contributors are normally the |
| 7 |
> > owners of the real package. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> No, it does not stop them, but it sure will curb the number of users |
| 10 |
> posting their bugs to the wrong place. Remember that only more advanced |
| 11 |
> users are the ones using overlays. We won't have Joe Sixpack using an |
| 12 |
> overlay. Instead it'll be Bob Developer-to-be. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
If the software a user wants is in an overlay, then the user will be |
| 15 |
forced to install the overlay. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Another thing that some people may not have considered - with many |
| 18 |
developers using various permutations of overlays, how can you |
| 19 |
guarantee that what is being checked into the main tree will build for |
| 20 |
a normal user? In order to test that, a developer would have to |
| 21 |
disable all overlays, unemerge everything provided by the overlays, |
| 22 |
and then build and test with a plain "non-overlay" gentoo. That's a |
| 23 |
lot of work; I doubt most developers are doing it. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
There is a discussion on the forums at the moment along a similar |
| 26 |
topic http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-443469.html - the vote |
| 27 |
seems to indicate 58% of users are "not really happy with the way the |
| 28 |
portage tree is handled". |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives