| 1 |
On Wed, 17 May 2017 17:26:55 +0200 |
| 2 |
"Paweł Hajdan, Jr." <phajdan.jr@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> I'd like to share some thoughts on this (hopefully not making things |
| 5 |
> even worse): |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> 1. William, posts like above |
| 8 |
> (<https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/1721#issuecomment-300178677>) |
| 9 |
> don't seem to help your case. GitHub could be one of the last few |
| 10 |
> places where Gentoo would be able to accept contributions from you as |
| 11 |
> a non-developer. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
I stopped long ago due to the people running Gentoo's Github. Excessive |
| 14 |
reviews of PR that introduced new issues in at least 1 case. It was a |
| 15 |
waste of time. Though prior to such I did get a few things in that way. |
| 16 |
I had high hope as it was the first time an outsider could effect large |
| 17 |
change, like say package removal. Though still requires proxy, not to |
| 18 |
mention when the review causes issues. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Sunrise and Github PRs are not even bandaids on a gashing wound. Gentoo |
| 21 |
needs more developers not outside contributors! For every outside |
| 22 |
contributor, it requires at least 1 Gentoo dev to proxy. If not several |
| 23 |
for review, etc. Time is better spent recruiting said contributor. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> 2. The ban is not permanent (yet?) - my understanding is it expires in |
| 26 |
> two weeks. This still gives you chance to positively contribute to |
| 27 |
> Gentoo. Based on the experience so far, I'd urge you to limit it to |
| 28 |
> uncontroversial technical matters, at least for some time. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
When will people learn. When you ban or drive away a contributor. They |
| 31 |
do not always come back. How does such an action motivate anyone to |
| 32 |
contribute more? It has the complete opposite effect! |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
This was the case in 2008. I left for MANY years. There are things |
| 35 |
STILL in tree that I was working on removing then. Even worse most any |
| 36 |
package I maintained is still without a maintainer, a decade later. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Gentoo has some serious lessons to learn it still has not. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
> 3. I can understand the frustration of people involved. The PR did not |
| 41 |
> land in ~year, even though the ebuilds added were hard-masked. The |
| 42 |
> risk of landing it was minimal, and it could provide good basis for |
| 43 |
> further contributions. Let me know if I missed an important reason |
| 44 |
> not to let it land. Finding some way to un-block developments like |
| 45 |
> these could be one of more productive directions for this |
| 46 |
> conversation. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
Not sure exactly what your saying here. The problem is the same as all. |
| 49 |
To accept/merge the contribution is trivial. To maintain the |
| 50 |
contribution is where the issue comes into play. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
The lack of man power issue... |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
Thus if no one can keep current and maintain, or has the time to |
| 55 |
continue to proxy. The contribution is turned away. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
-- |
| 58 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
Archives