1 |
On 01-04-2018 20:29:59 +0200, Michał Górny wrote: |
2 |
> > > This essentially looks like ~700 lines of code to try to workaround |
3 |
> > > broken networking. I would rather try to do that using 5 lines of code |
4 |
> > > but that's just me, and my programs aren't enterprise quality. I just |
5 |
> > > hope it actually solves as many problems as it's going to introduce. |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> > The vast majority of this code is generic and reusable, and I do intend |
8 |
> > to reuse it. For example, the executor support will be an essential |
9 |
> > piece for the asyncio.AbstractEventLoop for bug 649588. |
10 |
> |
11 |
> Sure it is and sure you will. But tell me: who is going to maintain it |
12 |
> all? Because as far as I can see, we're still dealing with a bus factor |
13 |
> of one and all you're doing is making it worse. More code, more |
14 |
> complexity, more creeping featurism and hacks. |
15 |
|
16 |
Well, well, well. This could be said about a lot of code, including |
17 |
your own. |
18 |
|
19 |
> Last time you went away, you left us with a horribly unmaintainable |
20 |
> package manager full of complexity, hacks and creeping featurism |
21 |
> and a Portage team whose members had barely any knowledge of the code. |
22 |
> Just when things started moving again, you came back and we're back to |
23 |
> square one. |
24 |
|
25 |
I don't see why this has to be made personal. In the olde days people |
26 |
just pushed whatever they needed, now it's reviewed and acked, so how |
27 |
can it be back to square one? |
28 |
|
29 |
> Today Portage once again is a one-developer project, full of more |
30 |
> complexity, more hacks and more creeping featurism. And we once again |
31 |
> have a bus factor of one -- one developer who apparently knows |
32 |
> everything, does everything and tries to be nice to everyone, except he |
33 |
> really ignores others, makes a lot of empty promises and consistently |
34 |
> makes the health of the project go from bad to worse. |
35 |
|
36 |
Errr, didn't you recently start your own fork with creeping featurism of |
37 |
its own because mainline was/is too slow? |
38 |
|
39 |
> So, please tell me: what happens when you leave again? How have you used |
40 |
> your time in the project? What have you done to make sure that |
41 |
> the project stays alive without you? Because as far as I can see, adding |
42 |
> few thousand of lines of practically unreviewed code every month does |
43 |
> not help with that. |
44 |
|
45 |
Why is this Zac's problem specifically? Isn't this a general problem of |
46 |
Gentoo? And isn't your attitude contributing in a large factor to |
47 |
the bus-factor getting down from 1 to 0? |
48 |
|
49 |
> I forked Portage because I didn't want to fight with you. When I forked |
50 |
> it, I declared that I will merge mainline changes regularly for |
51 |
> the benefit of my users. But after a week, I really start feeling like |
52 |
> that's going to be a really bad idea. Like it's time to forget about |
53 |
> mainline Portage as a completely dead end, and go our separate ways. |
54 |
|
55 |
So you fork. Like many forks, that is because people feel that it isn't |
56 |
going "their way". Yay. That doesn't make you "right". |
57 |
|
58 |
> I'm seriously worried about the future of Gentoo. I'd really appreciate |
59 |
> if you started focusing on that as well. I get that all this stuff looks |
60 |
> cool on paper but few months or years from now, someone will curse |
61 |
> 'whoever wrote that code' while trying to fix some nasty bug. Or get |
62 |
> things moving forward. Or implement EAPI 8. |
63 |
|
64 |
Perhaps it's time to look into the mirror. |
65 |
|
66 |
Thanks, |
67 |
Fabian |
68 |
|
69 |
-- |
70 |
Fabian Groffen |
71 |
Gentoo on a different level |