Re: [gentoo-server] Portage Maintenance

[Kurt Lieber]

On Tue, Sep 07, 2004 at 09:29:18AM -0700 or thereabouts, Mark Rudholm wrote:
> What I wanted to do was understand what the problem is.  I can't decide how to
> respond unless I understand something about the problem first.  And if the
> problem is a shortage of developers, as seems to be the consensus, then I
> have my answer.  I'd be interested in hearing discussion on how that can be
> addressed (as a trend, not on an individual basis), but if we can't get past
> the "well, you should contribute!" stage, then obviously that discussion
> can't be had here.

Speaking about ebuild upgrades, specifically, that is a problem that may
have a different solution.  Previously, I have suggested (in other
channels) having a fourth tier of ebuilds in the tree (right now, we have
hard masked, arch masked and stable).  The fourth tier would be "totally
untested and unsupported" and would/could consist of user-contributed
ebuilds.  There would/could be a feedback process for these ebuilds and,
after a certain threshold had been reached, a fourth-tier ebuild could be
automatically moved into ~arch status.

Now, whenever I bring up this idea, people tend to get too focused on the
implementation details and refuse to debate the idea as just that, an idea.
They want to debate what the threshold would be for automatic inclusion in
~arch or what language the script should be written in.  That's generally
when I get frustrated and move on to other things.

So, I think there is a possibility of some sort of automated process
whereby users can contribute ebuilds and get them into the tree in *some*
fashion.  However, it needs someone to take charge and try and get some
traction around the idea.  Probably also means writing a GLEP, debating the
finer points of the implementation, etc.  That person is not me.  If you
(meaning the collective you) want to take the idea and run with it, please
feel free.

OK, there's today's random thought.

--kurt