Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Alastair Tse <liquidx@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Public Relations
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 11:29:07
Message-Id: 1057145341.10019.46.camel@huggins.eng.cam.ac.uk
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: Public Relations, was: Re: [gentoo-core] proposal: make gentoo-core publicly read-only by Paul
1 On Wed, 2003-07-02 at 06:42, Paul wrote:
2 > I have been conditioned to not submit ebuilds anymore, after
3 > having submitted them regularly for some time; (I touch upon this
4 > in bug 6808) I still hope to continue contributing bugs,
5
6 Hi Paul,
7
8 I've always tried to stay out of this "-core being open" debate because
9 I too don't feel much either way. But that bug reference has pushed me
10 to answer some of your concerns in this email.
11
12 Comment on the your concerns about submitted ebuilds being ignored. At
13 least on all the bugs I'm assigned, I _try_ to give feedback whenever it
14 is possible, say what is holding up an ebuild going into portage, and be
15 frank about what I think about the ebuild or the fitness of the
16 application/library. Of course, you'll find exceptions to that comments
17 if you go thru all my bugs :P
18
19 In this case with gbonds, given that most, if not all, devs in
20 gnome@g.o are not US citizens and have no US bond. It was very
21 difficult for us to support the ebuild to any degree. With committing
22 the ebuild, comes responsibility and expectation that it would work. For
23 example, similar situation I encounter now is I'm maintaining
24 gphoto2/gtkam suite even though I have no digital camera compatible with
25 that. Users come to me with bugs about it, and I can't do any real
26 bugfixing on it. Sure it compiles, installs, and launches, but I can't
27 verify any of the functionality.
28
29 Maybe we really need dedicated users who do commit to being responsible
30 for a particular package because they are very familiar with it, and
31 actively submit version updates, help to debug problems with the
32 package, etc. We don't have a system for this right now, although some
33 time previously, we had the idea of "watchers" who would be similar to
34 that type of user. But I don't know what happened to the idea or why it
35 was abandoned.
36
37 > preferably with patches. (although I often have better luck just
38 > pushing them upstream.) This is ok for me, since writing ebuilds
39
40 Pushing patches upstream is always easier, because they'll either be
41 rejected and accepted. The problem with us maintaining patches that are
42 not officially accepted is that the developers for the package will
43 blame us for modifying their app/library and refuse to support Gentoo
44 users, leaving a sour taste in both the developer's and user's mouth.
45
46 > Instead of tortured analogies, just say it the way it
47 > is; "we want core closed, and if you dont like it, you are free
48 > to choose another distribution, or fork..."
49
50 I'm very certain that has never been the view of the dev-team. I've
51 certainly not encountered anyone who has said anything similar to this.
52
53 > organisation. (Ive seen it on my local LUG list-- people saying
54 > 'Ive heard this and that and this; maybe youd better think twice
55 > before commiting to Gentoo...') That is to say, these feelings
56 > and doubts are very real, and I hope that even though core
57 > members find them baseless, that they find a way to communicate
58 > that without seeming so condescending.
59
60 Well, distro wars are what LUGs are about, or that's what I've heard :)
61 Anyway, I'll have my small comment about -core opening up. I could write
62 a whole essay if I wanted to. So, if we do open up -core, what is to say
63 that devs would not push inter-dev communication on contentious issues
64 to private CC lists, or a gentoo-core-core?
65
66 Also, how open do these lists have to be? Would people comprimise on an
67 archive that just lists the subjects discussed on -core? This would
68 alleviate "security matters" being exposed because only the topic would
69 not provide enough details for anyone to pre-emptively exploit, or would
70 it?
71
72 On the concluding note, before I became a dev, I didn't even know a
73 -core list existed, and to be honest, I didn't even care. What I was
74 trying to do was just make the distro I was using better. Getting
75 involved with a distro is more than reading mail archives of -core,
76 getting involved is actually contributing to the distro or help other
77 users.
78
79 I understand this issue will never go away. Maybe someone with enough
80 time on their hands would actually write a summary on all the arguments
81 presented since the beginning of time about -core. That would be an
82 interesting read :)
83
84 Cheers,
85 --
86 Alastair 'liquidx' Tse
87 >> Gentoo Developer
88 >> http://www.liquidx.net/ | http://cvs.gentoo.org/~liquidx/
89 >> GPG Key : http://cvs.gentoo.org/~liquidx/liquidx_gentoo_org.asc
90 >> FingerPrint : 579A 9B0E 43E8 0E40 EE93 BB1C 38CE 1C7B 3907 14F6

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Public Relations Daniel Armyr <daniel.armyr@××××.se>