Hi! Since i haven't seen any reply since the 21st and 3.5.12 about to be released today, i'd say let's take a vote!
After reading the arguments, i have to rechoice and feel a new clean + frsh overlay could be be beneficial. Also i think it would be good idea to start with clean ebuilds, without any (gentoo-sepcific) patches, if they are not needed for a working copy of trinity. This can be added later on.. On Tuesday 21 September 2010 14:08:01 Ladislav Laska wrote: > As you may have noticed, there is another thread and some of current > developers have suggested new overlay. > > I personally am not really decided what would be best. Addint it to > current overlay does have its benefits - easy update and so on. But > having overlay just for trinity gives better options for new users - > they could install clean trinity, without third-party stuff (well, at > least without unmaintained stuff). I'd imagine there are many tools > noone uses. > > Well, I'd go for an overlay, but since we don't have a leader (don't > we?) or some position like that, I feel like I shouldn't make an > decision myself, so should we take a vote or something? :-) > > Regards Ladislav Laska > S pozdravem Ladislav Laska > --- > xmpp/jabber: [email protected] > > > > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 10:42 AM, Ladislav Laska > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > It should definitely be hardmasked until it's complete. When the time > > comes and trinity will be ready, we shall unmask it and let users > > upgrade. > > > > Anyone who wishes not to, could easily mask it back, since all trinity > > ebuilds will be clearly higher version. We should also create a list > > in documentation for this purpose (don't want to push users to > > upgrade, since some of them are using 3.5.10 and may not want a > > change). > > > > Regards Ladislav Laska > > S pozdravem Ladislav Laska > > --- > > xmpp/jabber: [email protected] > > > > On Tue, Sep 21, 2010 at 10:20 AM, Roman <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> +1 for that. > >> > >> I think it would be too confusing if we add another overlay. > >> Why not put TDE (are we calling it TDE now?) ~ or mask it via > >> package.mask until we have a working (possibly not bug-free) version? > >> > >> On Tuesday 21 September 2010 10:07:52 Ladislav Laska wrote: > >>> Yes, that's what I was thinking. I'm also thinking we could make all > >>> "original" ebuilds stable and TDE releases sort out by ~, at least for > >>> now. > >>> > >>> > >>> Regards Ladislav Laska > >>> S pozdravem Ladislav Laska > >>> --- > >>> xmpp/jabber: [email protected] > >>> > >>> 2010/9/20 "Petr Morávek [Xificurk]" <[email protected]>: > >>> > Personally, I don't see much point in creating a new overlay since it > >>> > would be most probably used by the same users as kde-sunset. We can > >>> > still keep old ebuilds of latest official KDE3 packages there and in > >>> > the same time add "new" releases of TDE. > >>> > > >>> > Petr > >>> > > >>> > Ladislav Laska napsal(a): > >>> >> Hello, > >>> >> > >>> >> I'd like to ask, what do you think of trinity project? The 3.5.12 > >>> >> release is relatively near and I'd like to start discussion wether > >>> >> to incorporate it into sunset, or develop it in separate overlay. > >>> >> > >>> >> I originally intended to do it in sunset, but now I'm not sure. The > >>> >> development seems to be pretty serious and maybe it won't be sunset > >>> >> anymore - I'd say we should create something like kde-resurrection. > >>> >> > >>> >> :-) > >>> >> > >>> >> What do you think? > >>> >> > >>> >> Regards Ladislav Laska > >>> >> S pozdravem Ladislav Laska > >>> >> --- > >>> >> xmpp/jabber: [email protected] > >> > >> greetings, > >> Roman > >> -- > >> And they lifted up their voices, and said, Jesus, Master, have mercy > >> on us. > >> -- Luke 17:13 greetings, Roman -- The biggest difference between time and space is that you can't reuse time. -- Merrick Furst
