| 1 |
Please understand my context: I absolutely love Gentoo Linux -- it's been |
| 2 |
that way since some March day in early 2001. |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 21 January 2015 at 12:44, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> I'm not saying that anything bundles libs... SONAME, etc). |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
<snipped unnecessary technical tangent.> |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> I don't see how you'd check for vulnerable libraries other than using |
| 13 |
> heuristics |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
<snipped unnecessary technical supposition>. T |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
> Such a model also only promotes choice to a degree. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
<snipped redundant argument about choice -- not different from current |
| 22 |
status quo> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> <snipped bginning of this> but the |
| 26 |
> only thing as a Council we really have the power to do is to forbid |
| 27 |
> people from working on other things, or to expel hot air. The latter |
| 28 |
> can accomplish some good, but not much. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
The Council's power is irrelevant this early in the discussion. |
| 32 |
No offense intended, but I see too many posts talking about Council's |
| 33 |
limited powers, and the fact that the Council can really only talk, but all |
| 34 |
that is fodder for a different thread. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
I would absolutely LOVE IT if the Council (and its members) would refrain |
| 37 |
from further expellations of hot air. Silence is not only more preferable, |
| 38 |
but more factually correct in such situations. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
> If I had solutions I'd be posting them. Apologies if it seems like |
| 42 |
> I'm nitpicking. The thing is that while the status quo has some clear |
| 43 |
> deficiencies, in some ways it is also the best Gentoo has really ever |
| 44 |
> been. |
| 45 |
> |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
It's not the nitpicking as such, but the irrelevant tangents that make for |
| 48 |
difficult to consume wall-of-text emails. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
And no, it is NOT the best that Gentoo has ever been. Gentoo has yet to |
| 51 |
actually be the best it can be. |
| 52 |
That requires -- drum roll -- FOCUS! |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
Gentoo is bloated and slow and takes forever and is full of fighting on the |
| 55 |
mailing lists. That last item is the only thing that's remained consistent. |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
> Or put another way, where else are we going to go? Maybe that is why |
| 59 |
> so many of us that seem to have so much conflict with each other all |
| 60 |
> stick around. |
| 61 |
> |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
Not sure what this is about (I almost snipped it). |
| 64 |
|
| 65 |
As someone who only ever uses Gentoo Linux, the thing I want to know from |
| 66 |
the developer community is: what exactly are you building? |
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
It's not a choice machine. Gentoo hasn't ever been a choice machine. I've |
| 69 |
been seeing variations of "Gentoo is about choice. Right? Right???" for a |
| 70 |
while now. |
| 71 |
|
| 72 |
It isn't -- it's about providing sensible options as alternatives to |
| 73 |
sensible defaults. The danger of stopping at "but but it's about choice!! |
| 74 |
CHOICE!!!!!!!eleven!!" is that the shit will not stop at that point. Any |
| 75 |
arbitrary damned thing becomes a choice (USE flag bloat makes those flags |
| 76 |
basically useless, for example). |
| 77 |
|
| 78 |
Here's what hasn't changed in the Gentoo experience: the emotion of |
| 79 |
fulfillment, achievement and satisfaction after that initial install -- the |
| 80 |
install you really care about. |
| 81 |
|
| 82 |
That feeling, that "je ne sais quoi" (I dunno what) -- that emotion is |
| 83 |
unique to the Gentoo experience. |
| 84 |
|
| 85 |
Instead of endless technical upmanships in these posts, I'd prefer to see |
| 86 |
the developer and leader community focus on the Gentoo experience as a |
| 87 |
product, and figure out how to maximise delivery of the Gentoogasm. |
| 88 |
|
| 89 |
Cheers, |
| 90 |
Seemant |
Archives