On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 00:34 +0000, likewhoa wrote: > > > Do you think commercial packages should be part of the main tree? > > > > Yes > > > > No > > > > Why not > > > > Never! > > > > in unofficial overlay > > > > Dunno > > > > Is this something that we really even want to ask? I mean, if we're all > > about trying to provide the best user experience, then binary packages > > are almost a requirement, especially with binary packages that were > > originally targeted at specific binary distributions. I tend to see > > this as one of those "religious" issues that is best left alone, like > > emacs versus vi. > > Yea commercial packages should maybe be part of overlays.gentoo.org so > that the tree can stay clean from these types of packages. But I agree > if it's decided not to included in the user survey.
I look at it very differently. One of the main advantages to Gentoo is being source-based. This allows us to ship "packages" in our repository for binary and commercial packages that would otherwise be impossible in a binary distribution. Remember, we don't actually ship the commercial software. We ship a bash script (essentially) that tells how to install the software. As much as I like to appeal to zealots (hahaha, right), I don't consider shipping a bash script telling how to install a product to be *anything* like shipping said product, endorsing it, or anything else license zealots will try to spout to justify the removal of GPL-2 code from our repository. Many people don't consider overlays, even Gentoo-run ones, to be of sufficient quality/support/whatever to be used on production systems. These are the same systems and people that would most likely utilize these commercial ebuilds. Basically, it is removing the *option* to install these packages from the people who would like to use them for the sake of the people who *REFUSE* to use the packages and insist on their removal from the tree simply because they don't like the license under which is was released. I'm sorry, but if that's not against the idea of a free and open community, I don't know what is. You have the right to chose what licenses you wish to support and use software which agrees with your ideals, but that doesn't give you the right to *DENY* others to do the same. Sorry, I just don't see it as a valid question, at all. > > > Do you like the Gentoo Linux Installer (GLI)? > > > > Yes > > > > No > > > > Never heard of it > > > > I'd like to see the answers to this one, but I have a feeling that > > everybody has a love/hate relationship with this. They either love it, > > or they hate it. I also tend to think that *many* people have an > > opinion on the Installer without ever even using it. As such, I don't > > think that we'd get any usable results out of this, but it'll still be > > fun to ask. > > I for one never used it so I can't really love or hate it but from > what people who have used it tells me to stay away from it because > I'll eventually hate it. Well, anybody who dislikes it because of bugs or a bad experience, I can completely understand. I was really speaking mostly of the people who dislike the *idea* of an Installer for Gentoo, and then go and bash it as much as they can without providing any real evidence or reasons, except for the old faithful "it's against the spirit of Gentoo" reason, which is a complete fallacy. Again, Gentoo is about empowering the users to make their own decisions. No, I won't say Gentoo is about choice, because that is *STUPID* in that it gives people an excuse to argue about even the biggest piece of junk being added to our tree or supported, as if we have to, to give them the "choice". Instead, I prefer the concept of empowering the user to make their own choices, where they can choose to add anything that they want in their personal overlay, as we have given them the tools to do so. Now, if a user wants to use an Installer and someone wants to write the code, who are you (or I) to say that they are in the wrong? After all, isn't it that idea of empowering the user *really* the spirit of Gentoo? I think so. > Thanks for the great feedback Chris Gianelloni You're totally welcome. Take what I've said here as my own opinion, of course. > Fernando -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Games Developer
Description: This is a digitally signed message part