-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Seemant Kulleen wrote: > On Sun, 2006-07-30 at 23:50 -0400, Brett I. Holcomb wrote: >> My concern is beyond me. As I stated I know enough about what to expect IF >> I >> use sunrise. But many do not and with it becoming official people figure >> it's gentoo and when it breaks Gentoo suffers. Gentoo has a reputation as a >> good solid, stable distro. As user and big fan of Gentoo I'm concerned - >> why >> couldn't sunrise have stayed unoffical like BMG. Why does it have to be >> official? Gentoo can choose to do what it feels is right and I will do the >> same.
It has just to be put clear that in this case "official" doesn't mean "solid", "right", "tested by our best QA", but simply "preferred". That is, I think we're not speaking of "official", but "_basically_ revised" and "encouraged". Many users (and I'm both a dev *and* a user) just could do much for Gentoo, but when you're interested in a niche sector package, you *don't have other choices* but 1) an endless wait for an open bug 2) becoming dev for the good of all :-) 3) just use your personal overlay, without sharing the results of your efforts. If the bug in 1) is still open, why updating it with your latest patches/revision bumps? Statistically you end up to 3). We just need something to reduce this "statistically". > BMG has, from day 1, been marginalised in the Gentoo community. I > always fancied that they should've been folded into the larger Gentoo > projects and become what Sunrise is today. The way I read you, your > fear is based on the possibility of some future perception by an unknown > number of people. Sunrise's idea is that stuff gets checked and > re-checked and remains accessible -- have you read through their site > and their commit histories and changesets? They're not exactly > dawdling. > > As for Gentoo's reputation, I'm actually pleasantly surprised to hear it > characterised that way :) If it has that reputation, then it will > actually take a lot to break that. I'm surprised that ~keywords didn't > already break it. I agree that the official portage tree is a QA > nightmare. Sunrise seems to be nipping that nightmare for a future date > -- ie by allowing people to commit and perform peer reviews, they're > grooming the next generation of developers to look at QA from the > outset, instead of as an afterthought. I'm just adding another good point to sunrise (or whatever will be a revised "preferred centralized repo of packages not officially supported"): you have another way to benefit of retired devs who just don't have the time to be responsible for the bugs of a package in an arch they don't know, but have the interest and the competence to add packages to an unofficial overlay. I'll be soon one of those devs: maybe some of the packages I maintain will finish as "maintainer-wanted". And, in this case, they could eventually end up in the sunrise overlay: a way for the users to help users. Just my 2 euro c -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFEzeL5xrlkonpN2woRAgR6AKCZ95pvY5BCaaHfkDeU0bXhsn3/ngCfWCTa QTpQ3b2LvCnENAWdTSZx5Ng= =GTM7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
