Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules

[Bo Ørsted Andresen]

On Saturday 15 December 2007 15:05:28 Grant wrote:
> > Neil correctly translated my pseudo-English to what I actually meant. I
> > don't want to make Portage binary based. I just want to make Portage's
> > binary package support more conveniently usable on big networks.

Even eclasses in the tree don't have any sort of checksums and they aren't 
even included in binary packages either...

> I don't think there is any shortage of great ideas here.  Can we get
> into specifics on how projects are born and become successful?
>
> So, what would need to happen for one of these projects to take off
> would be one or more people to be in charge of it and organize it, and
> they recruit as many people as possible to work on the project along
> with them?

The real blocker for features that I'd like Gentoo to support is Portage. 
There is only 1½ people working on it and changing anything in it is hard 
because Portage is a horrible mess. There's plenty of activity in the tree 
but new desired features cannot be used in the tree until Portage supports 
them. It also doesn't make matters better that over the years all sorts of 
weird hacks (that now have to be supported) have been added to the tree 
instead of waiting for proper solutions. Most people who are capable of 
helping to improve Portage just don't want to touch it.

> Does that recruitment generally take the form of volunteers finding the
> project as opposed to the project finding volunteers?  Any light to shed on
> this process for me?

If there's one thing we definitely don't need it's more clueless people who 
become developers just because they claim they want to do something. Being 
stalled is better than major screw ups that hurt everyone and than moving in 
the wrong direction.

-- 
Bo Andresen