On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 11:10 -0500, Grant Goodyear wrote: > Over the years we've had a fairly consistent stream of suggestions that > we should open up the e-build maintaining process to users instead of > just devs. The main arguments against it are the security issues and an > expectation that it would add to developer workloads. The former is > certainly a real problem, although signing (assuming a reasonable > web-of-trust) could mitigate that some (at least we'd know who to > blame). The latter, however, is conjecture, and the only good way to > verify it would be to actually try it and see what happens. Oh, and > there's also a very real fear that if things go horribly wrong, that > Gentoo's reputation would suffer quite badly. Perhaps I'm naive, but I > tend to think that if we were to advertise project sunrise as > experimental, temporary, use-at-your-own-risk, and > might-break-your-system, and even put it on hardware without a > gentoo.org address and add a portage hook that warns whenever the > project sunrise overlay is used, then our reputation isn't really likely > to suffer even if it's a complete disaster. > > So, Chris, what have I failed to address that would make this a really > bad idea?
Honestly, I'm not feeling the urge to retype everything I put into my last email again, just because someone else asked it. This has come up time and time again, and every time it gets shot down for lots of reasons. Why is it suddenly a good idea now, when it has always been a bad idea before? Is it just that now we have a lot of developers who are willing to allow users to break their boxes? -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
