Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@g.o>
To: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] [RFC] New project: GURU [Gentoo User Repository, Unreviewed]
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2019 13:28:35
Message-Id: 1549286908.893.5.camel@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-project] [RFC] New project: GURU [Gentoo User Repository, Unreviewed] by Alexis Ballier
On Mon, 2019-02-04 at 11:58 +0100, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Feb 2019 20:28:49 +0100 > Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote: > > > --- > > What do you think? > > > > What is the difference with sunrise ?
The difference, as noted in the mail, is that it doesn't rely on developers having time to review ebuilds. Therefore, it is less likely to die because of developers lacking time to review stuff.
> One of the advantages of sunrise is that it had 2 repos: One > unreviewed, without Gentoo official name and big fat warnings, one > reviewed by devs more widely available.
No. First of all, they weren't really two repos -- they were more like private and public branches which were made into two repos due to technical limitations. With the public branch getting all the commits from private branch merged. Secondly, both branches were reviewed. The difference is that people were supposed to ask for (IRC) review before committing to the first branch, and only developers were allowed to merge to the second branch. Thirdly, I have no clue what 'Gentoo official name' is in this contexts and I certainly don't recall big fat warnings. The only difference was that the public repo was advertised publicly while the former was intended for development. -- Best regards, Michał Górny

Attachments

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

Replies