Gentoo Archives: gentoo-science

From: John Tee <johnmtee@××××××××.fm>
To: gentoo-science@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-science] unsubscribe
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2005 23:20:21
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-science] Re: Scientific herd leadership by "Marcus D. Hanwell"
Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
> On Monday 22 August 2005 08:48, C Y wrote: > >>Perhaps we could have a "support team" behind someone with official >>Gentoo developer status - people could point out significant ebuilds >>with most logic in place to the developer, help work out quirks in the >>programs/ebuilds, and generally speed things up? Certainly the >>developer would bear final responsibility but this way those of us with >>five hours every month or so could help out too, particularly for >>specialty packages. (BTY, if some genius could figure out brl-cad I >>would be grateful - it's going to take me a year at this point :-/.) > > > I was wondering myself if some people in here might be receptive to the idea > of a support team, much like the arch testers we have for the amd64 porting > team. It often leads on to people becoming devs, but is a great way to help > out when you can. > > Tony Murray is filling that kind of role unofficially with all the work he > puts into the boinc and setiathome ebuilds, whilst I review, test, improve > and commit them once they are up to standard. I also have good contact with > the quickplot developer who has integrated my patches upstream and helped > significantly with the ebuilds for that package. > > I think these relationships are important, and I personally nurture them as > much as possible. Many scientific packages are very involved and having > people help test and work out problems can significantly increase our > efficiency as a team. > >>There are a fair number of at least partial ebuilds for useful >>scientific software stuck in bugzilla - brl-cad and acl2 come >>immediately to mind, and I know there are others. Plus a fair number >>that don't have ebuilds where it would be useful to have them. Gentoo >>is alreay one of the best for scientific software, due to compiling >>things being easy and our ebuild pool, but we could definitely do >>better. > > > The problem comes down to manpower and a need to recruit some more people to > the team. Having a support team similar to the arch testers could certainly > help in our case if those people were not ready to become devs/didn't have > the time. Once a package has been committed they would also need to help with > version bumps and fixing bugs with the new packages ideally. > >>My machine is probably a poor test machine - what gentoo environment >>would we need to maintain? > > > Just an up to date Gentoo install is fine. If you are testing some more > experimental stuff (I test new baselayout, glibc, gcc and other core stuff > sometimes) then a chroot might also be adviseable. Scientific apps just > require an up to date system. > > Thanks, > > Marcus
-- gentoo-science@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-science] unsubscribe Patrick Kursawe <phosphan@g.o>