Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Monday 24 March 2008, Doug Goldstein wrote:
Doug Goldstein wrote:
All,
This is a formal notice to everyone that OpenRC will be hitting the
Gentoo tree sooner rather then later. I would like to see *ALL* arch
teams give the current code a whirl on their systems, which is
available via the layman module "openrc".
I would also like to give the docs team a chance to weigh in here and
work with me on a migration guide as well as any necessary updates.
That being said, I will be the primary point of contact on the
transition to OpenRC appearing in ~arch (along with it's associated
baselayout-2.0.0 ebuild). Any and all grievances, concerns,
suggestions and comments can and should be routed to me via the
associated Bugzilla entries or e-mail.
I do not want OpenRC to come as a surprise to anyone and break their
system. I expect we will leave no stone unturned and go for a very
smooth transition.
That being said, the bug for the addition of OpenRC is #212696 [1].
The bug for the documentation is #213988 [2].
Lastly, I will be out of town March 21st through March 23rd. I will
not have IRC access but I will have e-mail and Bugzilla access.
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=212696
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213988
It appears my migration plan was not good enough for Mike Frysinger
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> and he went ahead and wrote his own version of the
OpenRC ebuild, differing from the one in the OpenRC layman repo, and
committed it to the tree this weekend.
Since my offer to work on the migration was not good enough for him, I'm
backing out and allowing him to handle the whole migration himself since
I haven't heard from him at all despite Roy (author of OpenRC) and my
attempts to contact him for 2 weeks regarding a migration plan for
OpenRC. All issues and comments can be directed to him.
I guess working together and documenting everything before having it hit
the tree was a bad plan and it had to be one-upped.
not sure why you're getting pissy. but let's put some things straight shall
we.
- the ebuild in question was from the layman repo. i changed things of course
because it didnt cover all upgrade pieces, had obvious style problems, and
did some things wrongly.
You mean it wasn't bash style and instead was functional POSIX shell
style. And by all upgrade paths would that include adding the bad
conversion of /etc/modules.autoload.d/ and removing important ewarn msgs
to users?
- i'd been poking openrc on my system long before "this weekend".
Great. And have you been working with the docs people or the arch teams
and with the Gentoo/FreeBSD guys? Because some of your changes might
work on your system, but not on other systems
- only pinging people on irc does not constitute real effort. we have e-mail
addresses too last i checked.
Refresh your mail client because I did send you e-mail. And as far as I
know, Roy did too.
- the package is still p.masked and de-keyworded. nothing precludes you from
working on it. or writing docs. or doing anything else you're talking about
doing.
- and no, i dont have a problem sticking masked/de-keyworded things in the
tree. people test things then.
-mike
It's called teamwork, Mike. It also looks awful suspicious when we don't
hear a peep out of you about OpenRC until 1 day before I was going to
add it to the tree. What would have been so hard about sending a follow
up e-mail to the thread I started about getting OpenRC in the tree
saying "Hey everyone, going to stick openrc-9999 in the tree now with
some changes I feel should be made."
--
[email protected] mailing list
