| 1 |
On Sun, 2004-07-11 at 00:39 +0200, Alexander Mieland wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> that's because I've made enough experience with people who steals ideas. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
But this is Linux/free software/whatever you call it. We're supposed to |
| 6 |
be about open exchange of ideas, not trade secrets. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> At this time, we are planning on it. We don't have something you could |
| 9 |
> look at. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Okay, this is where I really think you got it wrong. My understanding |
| 12 |
is what really turns people on in the Linux/free software/whatever you |
| 13 |
call it community is the product, not the idea. You seem to be thinking |
| 14 |
like a corporate person. I know of a few projects in the free software |
| 15 |
community that failed because a few persons had a good idea, but failed |
| 16 |
to gain outside support because they didn't have the product to back it |
| 17 |
up. Put your code where your mouth is and if the infrastructure group |
| 18 |
finds it worthy and appropriate then it might become a .gentoo.org. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
But still I think you're going about it the wrong way. If you really |
| 21 |
want to do something useful then just do it. It shouldn't matter |
| 22 |
whether it's .gentoo.org worthy or not. When I started writing |
| 23 |
packages.gentoo.org (fresh ebuilds) it was originally just to satisfy a |
| 24 |
personal itch. I didn't see any way to tell when a new package was |
| 25 |
added to portage. So originally it just ran on my machine. I had no |
| 26 |
intention of creating an "official" gentoo.org site. But then I thought |
| 27 |
others "might" find it useful so I put it up on my web site. Then it |
| 28 |
became a .gentoo.org site. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
You seem to be going the opposite direction. You want the site first |
| 31 |
and then you start coding. But I think you miss the idea. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
As far as the idea itself. I think it's been mentioned many many times |
| 34 |
before why these things aren't accurate. If one were to implement |
| 35 |
something like this, I'd think they shouldn't use "real" numbers because |
| 36 |
they will almost always "just plain wrong". I think an arbitrary |
| 37 |
coefficient would be more accurate, though still not precise. But make |
| 38 |
up a value ala BogoMips, call it Gentoo Hours or something. Make the |
| 39 |
time it takes to compile glibc (version x) to be 1 Gentoo Hour. And the |
| 40 |
time it takes to compile any other program will be a factor of that base |
| 41 |
Gentoo Hour. That "might" be more accurate but is still "just plain |
| 42 |
wrong" ;-). |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
--m |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
-- |
| 50 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives