On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 12:56:36 -0500
Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
I think the real problem is that there aren't many devs who care about
Java in the first place. That isn't a policy problem - it is a
manpower problem.
+1
In the past two years, I've committed much to the Java
On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 18:20:01 -0500
Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
What do you do if somebody blocks progress in your overlay structure?
You start another one.
Sounds like something that can work, survival of the [insert anything].
What do you do if somebody blocks progress in the
On Sun, 23 Nov 2014 23:50:48 +0100
hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
Again: you are confusing a specific incident with my proposal of a
distributed model. I was just bringing it up as an _additional_
argument why I find the distributed approach more interesting...
because it makes it easier
On 2014-11-22 18:12, wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
The first 100 or so I looked at, are deprecated. They just need
somebody
to 'remove them' the BGO java backlog is being artificially used to
prevent java work on gentoo. Somebody of authority needs to open
up java for other folks to work on.
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 10:21 AM, thegee...@thegeezer.net wrote:
all of gentoo council meetings happen on irc if i remember right so it's not
like there is an elite group deciding fate they are just sorting things that
need to be sorted.
Per Gentoo's social contract [1] we try to be open
Rich Freeman:
There has been a
desire for a long time to try to make it easier to contribute, but in
the end people have to step up to make that happen. Those who are
most passionate about it are of course the best candidates to try to
drive change.
That's a common misconception in
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 12:29 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
That's a common misconception in gentoo. Someone has an idea and no one
cares until he makes it happen. A lot of ideas are not so trivial that
you can just make it happen. You need consensus, a shift of thinking,
workflow
I still don't see a good argument why we made our system so inflexible,
that obviously needed change needs such high amount of work, PR and proof.
Trying to improve gaming in gentoo took me 2 years full of work just to
realize it is a dead end and I am doing most of the work alone.
The necessity
On Thu, Nov 27, 2014 at 2:04 AM, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 12:29 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
I don't know of literally any big project except gentoo that still does
not _require_ a review workflow. Git would be the perfect excuse to
make it
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 3:28 PM, konsolebox konsole...@gmail.com wrote:
Is it really official that most significant people on Gentoo don't like the
change from CVS to Git? Has there been a general discussion about it, and
what is basically everyone's general argument to it? Just in case
Am 26.11.2014 um 21:39 schrieb Rich Freeman:
Most devs can't wait to switch to git. There are a few who might
prefer to stick with cvs but overall I don't think that is preventing
us from switching at all.
(without having read the whole thread, sorry)
my *personal opinion* is that git
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Stefan G. Weichinger li...@xunil.at wrote:
Sometimes I wonder why syncing portage isn't yet available via git ;-)
Well, right now it is because it is too much of a pain to try to keep
cvs and git in sync.
However, the plan for the future is to have a master
you might check out webrsync fwiw
On 11/26/14 23:43, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 4:58 PM, Stefan G. Weichinger li...@xunil.at wrote:
Sometimes I wonder why syncing portage isn't yet available via git ;-)
Well, right now it is because it is too much of a pain to try to keep
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 8:51 PM, Paige Thompson erra...@yourstruly.sx wrote:
you might check out webrsync fwiw
Webrsync is great, of course, but not really the same thing as git.
Changelogs will also go away when we move to git.
--
Rich
You know I don't think thats going to happen because if you look at
layman its not as if they didn't think of using git for package trees;
all of them do use git.
A good example of why I don't think they will be using git for portage:
``git clone https://git.kernel.org'
This takes a very long
Have a look at this
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2935899/is-there-any-git-repository-with-official-daily-updated-gentoo-portage
On 11/27/14 02:03, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 8:51 PM, Paige Thompson erra...@yourstruly.sx wrote:
you might check out webrsync fwiw
Webrsync
On Wed, Nov 26, 2014 at 9:17 PM, Paige Thompson erra...@yourstruly.sx wrote:
A good example of why I don't think they will be using git for portage:
``git clone https://git.kernel.org'
This takes a very long time and a lot of bandwidth and a lot of space.
Why move data that isn't going to be
Paige Thompson:
You know I don't think thats going to happen because if you look at
layman its not as if they didn't think of using git for package trees;
all of them do use git.
A good example of why I don't think they will be using git for portage:
``git clone https://git.kernel.org'
We didn't disband the team because we thought that having a
team focused on games wasn't a bad idea, but so far nobody else seems
all that interested so it seems as likely as not that there won't be a
games team in the future.
Probably a chicken-and-egg thing. I want to play games on my Gentoo,
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 3:20 AM, Sid S r03...@gmail.com wrote:
Today, ebuilds don't even let a chance for an admin to apply a series of
patches to the vanilla/distro-maintainer sources without having to
rewrite/fork the ebuild.
There isn't a way to specify ebuild properties in a way like
Oh. I've had to use that, even. I was thinking patches of ebuilds. (???)
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 6:41 AM, Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 3:20 AM, Sid S r03...@gmail.com wrote:
Today, ebuilds don't even let a chance for an admin to apply a series of
patches to
On 11/23/2014 12:20 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 5:44 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 11/22/2014 11:20 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
Nobody can block progress under the current model. If you feel
otherwise, please point them out so that they can be dealt with.
They
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 5:50 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 11/23/2014 12:20 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
You have just as many options under the status quo, and actually more.
Why would that be? We have a centralized _culture_. All this is
basically about culture, not just about
On 11/24/2014 12:24 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
So regrouping is not as easy as you make it sound. Totally not. I don't
like ruby eclasses and their virtuals. What can I do? Fix them? No, I
cannot. Stop saying I can fix everything I please. That is incorrect and
our model makes it even more
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 6:45 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
As long as you actually commit to maintaining the Nethack package, you
can do this.
As above: I think it's wrong.
Your opinion is noted. Your argument was that policy issues were
preventing you from fixing Nethack. Now
On 11/24/2014 12:24 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
* kickban major assholes from the community, no matter how efficient
they are
Proposals welcome. Hint, things will go much better if you volunteer
to do the work the assholes are doing... It isn't like we aren't all
tired of this stuff, but if
On Sun, Nov 23, 2014 at 7:12 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 11/24/2014 12:24 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
* kickban major assholes from the community, no matter how efficient
they are
Proposals welcome. Hint, things will go much better if you volunteer
to do the work the assholes are
On 11/22/14 01:20, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 7:13 PM, wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
On 11/21/14 17:10, Rich Freeman wrote:
If you want to work on them, you might consider becoming a dev, or
working on them in an overlay (which is a good way to become a dev,
actually).
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 1:12 PM, wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
The first 100 or so I looked at, are deprecated. They just need somebody
to 'remove them' the BGO java backlog is being artificially used to
prevent java work on gentoo. Somebody of authority needs to open
up java for other
On 11/22/14 13:00, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 1:12 PM, wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
The first 100 or so I looked at, are deprecated. They just need somebody
to 'remove them' the BGO java backlog is being artificially used to
prevent java work on gentoo. Somebody of
On 11/22/2014 07:12 PM, wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
On 11/22/14 01:20, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 7:13 PM, wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
On 11/21/14 17:10, Rich Freeman wrote:
If you want to work on them, you might consider becoming a dev, or
working on them in an
Am 22.11.2014 um 20:59 schrieb wirel...@tampabay.rr.com:
On 11/22/14 13:00, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 1:12 PM, wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
The first 100 or so I looked at, are deprecated. They just need
somebody
to 'remove them' the BGO java backlog is being
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 1:54 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
No one would care in such a distributed model if there is one person
blocking progress somewhere. They would just move on, regroup around a
new overlay and start working there and let that guy/project rot forever.
Nobody
On 11/22/2014 11:20 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 1:54 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
No one would care in such a distributed model if there is one person
blocking progress somewhere. They would just move on, regroup around a
new overlay and start working there and
On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 5:44 PM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 11/22/2014 11:20 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
Nobody can block progress under the current model. If you feel
otherwise, please point them out so that they can be dealt with.
They can block progress and they do. And by
Here's one, very, very interesting proposals, under
serious consideration:
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Distributed_Gentoo
I'd be curious what the fine and wonderful folks at
gentoo_user think of this proposal. Old farts are
welcome to comment, even encourage to constructively rant
I may be misunderstanding, but isn't this cutting back the centralized
development and a pushing for more extensive use of overlays?
To me overlays cause a problem with packages overlapping each other too
much because its the way their maintainers' ebuilds are written.
If anything, I'd suggest
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:34 PM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
Here's one, very, very interesting proposals, under
serious consideration:
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Distributed_Gentoo
I'd be curious what the fine and wonderful folks at
gentoo_user think of this proposal. Old
On 11/21/14 18:14, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:34 PM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
Here's one, very, very interesting proposals, under
serious consideration:
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Distributed_Gentoo
I'd be curious what the fine and wonderful folks at
On 11/21/14 14:00, Paige Thompson wrote:
On 11/21/14 18:14, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 12:34 PM, James wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
Here's one, very, very interesting proposals, under
serious consideration:
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Distributed_Gentoo
I'd be curious
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 5:40 PM, wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
Interesting perspective that I had not considered... still, I think there is
more at play here. It sounds as if a few chosen old guard
are going to kick out more of the progressive and newer devs
so that these few. control the
On 11/21/14 17:10, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 5:40 PM, wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
Interesting perspective that I had not considered... still, I think there is
more at play here. It sounds as if a few chosen old guard
are going to kick out more of the progressive and newer
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 7:13 PM, wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
On 11/21/14 17:10, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Fri, Nov 21, 2014 at 5:40 PM, wirel...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
Interesting perspective that I had not considered... still, I think there
is
more at play here. It sounds as if a few
43 matches
Mail list logo
