Re: [gentoo-project] rfc: separate /usr preparation vote

[Anthony G. Basile]

On 08/18/2013 09:46 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 9:08 AM, Anthony G. Basile
> <basile@××××××××××××××.edu> wrote:
>> ditto.  I want this debated in the community, ie, I want to hear the
>> community say "all the preperation for dropping support ... are complete".
> The community will never say that, just like no community ever said
> "hey, we need a source-based linux distro!"

There may be valid objects which will be silenced by the rush.  I'd like 
to hear from people whom this will directly affect, like Chainsaw.

>
> Progress and change gets initiated by individuals or small teams, and
> the community always has to play catch up.  That's just how change and
> innovation works.

This is not innovation.

>
> The role of the community is to say why preparations AREN'T complete.
> The default needs to be action, not inaction.  If we only change
> things when a majority are clamoring for change, then I suggest that
> anybody cares about running an interesting distro fork Gentoo now.
> This isn't CentOS, and we're not going to backport patches to linux
> 2.4 until 95% of our customers agree that whatever proprietary blob
> they're using is ready for 2.6.
>
> Don't get me wrong - I'd love to see debate.  However, williamh made a
> proposal, and if somebody wants to argue that we aren't ready yet then
> they need to step up and do it.

In other words, let's give the community a chance to bring forward concerns.

> That is how every court in the world
> works, as far as I know (if you don't show up, you don't get a say).
> I'm not really chomping at the bit to see stuff move to /usr, but if
> people have a reason to ask for inaction, they need to voice it, and
> not just ask everybody else to pass time.  If there is a reason to
> hold things up I'll be the first to agree to hold things up,

We are rushing this.  People need time to think of the consequences.  So 
a valid reason for waiting is that I (and probably others) haven't had 
the time to think through the consequences.  We have a 6 month window, 
why is it so important that this be done now?

> but there
> has to be a reason, otherwise I'll probably support WONTFIXing any
> separate-/usr regressions on existing packages, not putting any
> restrictions on packages that weren't stable more than a year ago, and
> allowing large changes to packages older than that if they can be
> justified.
>
> Rich
>
If this had been done in 2008, my entire teaching lab would have been 
broken.

-- 
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D.
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened]
E-Mail    : blueness@g.o
GnuPG FP  : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB  DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA
GnuPG ID  : F52D4BBA