On Sun, 15 Jun 2008 22:27:35 +0400 Peter Volkov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > How would a voting system be better than the current "if anyone > > doesn't like it, don't commit it until whatever they don't like is > > fixed" process? > > Voting makes the process converging. It helps to avoid same arguments > in the next cycle of discussions. If you failed to find arguments and > convince majority - you have to live with decision which you don't > agree with.
Please point to specific examples of discussions we've had so far regarding patches for PMS where a consensus has not been reached without having to resort to voting. > > Do you think that the differences between the proportion of patches > > from 'Paludis people' that are accepted or rejected and the > > proportion of patches from 'Portage people' or 'Pkgcore people' > > indicates a problem? > > No. Part of the problem is that working group on PMS does not include > developers from other PMs. Every patch submitted by developers of other PMs has been accepted. > > I'm curious as to why you think the actively contributing members > > of the PMS team aren't acting in Gentoo's interests, though. > > Actually I don't think so. That's why I don't want to dismiss PMS and > I'm looking how to make it "official". PMS is already an official Gentoo project. > how we can call PMS "official" if none of Gentoo portage gurus voiced > to support it? The people who know Portage and ebuilds best, and who are most aware of the implications of PMS, aren't the Portage developer. Have a read of bug 222721 if you want a perfect example. > And if portage developers are not interested in PMS I don't think > council could do something besides trying to convince them or until > new portage developer arise and fix/approve PMS... You know the > rules: want to change things happen in Gentoo - became active > developer. In this case you have to became active portage developer. Most of the difficult bits of PMS have an awful lot to do with ebuilds and very little to do with Portage. The Portage developer is more interested in doing other things, and there's no reason to hold PMS up until another person can be given the "Portage developer" label. -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
