| 1 |
On 20:38 Mon 01 Jul , Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote: |
| 2 |
> Rich Freeman schrieb: |
| 3 |
> > First, most people aren't going to quit over this. The maintainer |
| 4 |
> > doesn't have to do anything but not actively revert changes made by |
| 5 |
> > the project teams. |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> I don't say that they quit altogether. Just that they may leave that |
| 8 |
> particular ebuild in portage alone (and continue in an overlay as was |
| 9 |
> suggested) because they don't want to have anything to do with the |
| 10 |
> changes that were forced upon them. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I might instead suggest that people own the code they've written, even |
| 13 |
if it's just part of an ebuild. If I run into a Prefix bug in an ebuild, |
| 14 |
I'm going to ask the team that actually knows something about Prefix to |
| 15 |
look into it. Same should hold true for any other code — you add it, you |
| 16 |
accept the responsibility of dealing with it. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
It seems to me that there's a couple of issues that really bother people |
| 19 |
here: |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
- The maintenance burden of any additional code; and |
| 22 |
- Overriding a maintainer's decisions on existing code. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
My suggestion helps to deal with the former, while I believe Rich has |
| 25 |
made a good point for the latter as part of larger changes that are |
| 26 |
either council-supported or have general consensus. When we voted GLEP |
| 27 |
39 in ourselves (or joined while it existed), we agreed to respect the |
| 28 |
decisions of the leadership and structure we chose. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Thanks, |
| 32 |
Donnie |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Donnie Berkholz |
| 35 |
Council Member / Sr. Developer, Gentoo Linux <http://dberkholz.com> |
| 36 |
Analyst, RedMonk <http://redmonk.com/dberkholz/> |
Archives