1 |
On Saturday 16 September 2006 09:51, Andrey G. Grozin wrote: |
2 |
> On Fri, 15 Sep 2006, Marcus D. Hanwell wrote: |
3 |
> > On Friday 15 September 2006 08:50, Andrey G. Grozin wrote: |
4 |
> > > On Thu, 14 Sep 2006, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
5 |
> > > > Pretty sure they're not interested in linking to external overlays. |
6 |
> > > > If you want a link, and to save some time on maintenance and future |
7 |
> > > > breakage, it might be easier to just migrate to their hosting. |
8 |
> > > |
9 |
> > > I think this is an excellent idea. First-class inofficial overlays live |
10 |
> > > at overlays.gentoo.org; we want the same status, we don't want to be |
11 |
> > > second- (or third-) class. |
12 |
> > |
13 |
> > I think this statement is incorrect about first or second class overlays. |
14 |
> > According to their own FAQs that is not the case. My own personal belief |
15 |
> > says it certainly is not that case. To make a more reasoned case you have |
16 |
> > to ask what the actual benefits of a move might be, i.e. bigger admin |
17 |
> > team, more widely used/tested, shiny gentoo.org domain ending... |
18 |
> > |
19 |
> > But like I said in my last response if the overall opinion is to move I |
20 |
> > will make the subversion repo backup available for migration of the |
21 |
> > overlay. I set it up as a service for the Gentoo scientific community |
22 |
> > before any of this was available as we were sick of waiting for it to |
23 |
> > appear... Now it has may be the overlay would be better there. I am not |
24 |
> > sure - I doubt it would hurt though... |
25 |
> |
26 |
> Suppose I am a Gentoo user, and I want to try some new package (or a |
27 |
> bleeding-edge version) which is not in the main tree. I search the Gentoo |
28 |
> website for links to some experimental overlays (something like rpmforge |
29 |
> and freshrpms in the RedHat world). And aha! I find overlays.gentoo.org |
30 |
> (and nothing else). If the package I want is in one of the overlays there, |
31 |
> I am happy. If not, I am stuck. |
32 |
> |
33 |
> In other words, overlays.gentoo.org lives on the Gentoo continent; |
34 |
> gentooscience.org is an island in the middle of nowhere. |
35 |
|
36 |
May be that is where our opinions of what the overlay is for are very |
37 |
different. I never set the overlay up with general users in mind, and that |
38 |
wasn't what we discussed when we were thinking about why we needed an |
39 |
overlay. |
40 |
|
41 |
In my opinion the overlay is there for interested users wishing to take a |
42 |
bigger role in development, using experimental ebuilds and helping to improve |
43 |
them until they are ready to go into the tree. As such I was never interested |
44 |
in trying to get the attention of some user searching for a particular ebuild. |
45 |
All ebuilds which are suitable should be moved into the main tree |
46 |
anyway and so the user will find it there... |
47 |
|
48 |
I never tried to keep the overlay secret, but why should users have to |
49 |
set up a myriad of overlays if they just want to run a system? May be you |
50 |
would be better off becoming a developer and adding stuff to the tree? If we |
51 |
follow a trend of keeping more and more stuff in various overlays then Gentoo |
52 |
just becomes more of a pain to run IMHO. |
53 |
|
54 |
I am hoping to get more proactive in moving suitable ebuilds from the overlay |
55 |
to the main tree in the near future. I will also be encouraging other devs to |
56 |
do the same if they are not already. So the overlay will get smaller as stuff |
57 |
is moved. Hopefully some of our active herd testers will go on to become |
58 |
developers and maintain some of this stuff themselves too. |
59 |
|
60 |
May be the aims of the overlay should be more clearly defined through debate |
61 |
and documented on the overlay site. I am away for the week starting in about |
62 |
one hour anyway... I will catch up on discussions when I get back. It would |
63 |
be good to hear what more people think about this subject - may be I am on my |
64 |
own with my opinions? |