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 |