| 1 |
On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 22:27:35 +0400 |
| 2 |
Peter Volkov <pva@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > How would a voting system be better than the current "if anyone |
| 4 |
> > doesn't like it, don't commit it until whatever they don't like is |
| 5 |
> > fixed" process? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Voting makes the process converging. It helps to avoid same arguments |
| 8 |
> in the next cycle of discussions. If you failed to find arguments and |
| 9 |
> convince majority - you have to live with decision which you don't |
| 10 |
> agree with. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Please point to specific examples of discussions we've had so far |
| 13 |
regarding patches for PMS where a consensus has not been reached |
| 14 |
without having to resort to voting. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> > Do you think that the differences between the proportion of patches |
| 17 |
> > from 'Paludis people' that are accepted or rejected and the |
| 18 |
> > proportion of patches from 'Portage people' or 'Pkgcore people' |
| 19 |
> > indicates a problem? |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> No. Part of the problem is that working group on PMS does not include |
| 22 |
> developers from other PMs. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Every patch submitted by developers of other PMs has been accepted. |
| 25 |
> > I'm curious as to why you think the actively contributing members |
| 26 |
> > of the PMS team aren't acting in Gentoo's interests, though. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Actually I don't think so. That's why I don't want to dismiss PMS and |
| 29 |
> I'm looking how to make it "official". |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
PMS is already an official Gentoo project. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
> how we can call PMS "official" if none of Gentoo portage gurus voiced |
| 34 |
> to support it? |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
The people who know Portage and ebuilds best, and who are most aware of |
| 37 |
the implications of PMS, aren't the Portage developer. Have a read of |
| 38 |
bug 222721 if you want a perfect example. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
> And if portage developers are not interested in PMS I don't think |
| 41 |
> council could do something besides trying to convince them or until |
| 42 |
> new portage developer arise and fix/approve PMS... You know the |
| 43 |
> rules: want to change things happen in Gentoo - became active |
| 44 |
> developer. In this case you have to became active portage developer. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
Most of the difficult bits of PMS have an awful lot to do with ebuilds |
| 47 |
and very little to do with Portage. The Portage developer is more |
| 48 |
interested in doing other things, and there's no reason to hold PMS up |
| 49 |
until another person can be given the "Portage developer" label. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
-- |
| 52 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives