On Fri, 2006-03-24 at 08:59 +0000, Stuart Herbert wrote: > > It is a Gentoo problem, because Gentoo gets innundated with bogus bug > > reports when users screw up their systems in weird ways and don't > > realise the cause. > > Convince me that this is something more than just a power play, and > I'll work with you. But that's the hurdle you'll need to overcome > first.
Perhaps because he's not the only one saying it? Really, people, can we leave our personal bullshit out of a technical discussion *just once*? > Second hurdle is that you need to convince me that you "get" what the > overlays are there for. If you can't, then I can have no confidence > that any policies you bring forward are appropriate for the work we're > trying to enable. They are there to speed development and to allow users to contribute more directly. They should not be readable by the public, otherwise we run into the problem of users that don't know what they are doing and followed some half-way written guide on the forums using ebuilds from these overlays, breaking their systems, and filing bugs. This is *not* acceptable. I see no problems with allowing users to gain read and even write access to overlays, but it must be done with a certain level of caution of the main tree, or you'll have a very hard time getting support from the developer community at large. > Thrid hurdle is that you need to convince me that you're capable of > treating the overlays differently to how the main tree is treated. If > you can't, then I'll feel that you hoodwinked me at the second hurdle. > > I'm sure you've got a lot to offer, to help make the overlays a > success. But your agenda has to be appropriate - otherwise you'll > just do more damage that good. Again, try to keep this technical discussion technical and leave your personal biases out of it. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
