On 05/08/18 18:01, Alec Warner wrote [excerpted]: > > > On Sun, Aug 5, 2018 at 12:45 PM, Richard Yao <r...@gentoo.org > <mailto:r...@gentoo.org>> wrote: > > > > On Jun 23, 2018, at 6:59 AM, Alec Warner <anta...@gentoo.org > <mailto:anta...@gentoo.org>> wrote: > >> >> I suspect this might be better done in the Linux foundation >> itself as they have staffing for core components that everyone is >> using. > This would put decision making power into the hands of > bureaucrats. I would rather it remain in a community of volunteers. > > > Meh, it doesn't hurt to ask there about interest (they certainly fund > development of other components.) Its not like they have to accept, or > that declining somehow inhibits this development. > > Part of my frustration is that seemingly "anything open source related > can be held in Gentoo" and I'm somewhat against that as I feel it > dilutes the Gentoo mission. We are here to make a distribution, not > maintain random libraries. If you want to do that feel free; but I > don't see a need for that work to be associated with Gentoo. > Maintaining a distro is increasingly becoming more a case of fixing upstream's shortcomings, as they move towards completely-bundled packages instead of thorough testing. Creating distribution packages, especially in a source-based distro like Gentoo, requires quite a lot of testing, and a lot of collating user feedback (in terms of bugs) to make sure that the packages built do actually *work*.
So no, whilst it does seem on the surface to be a dilution of effort, if it reduces the overall effort to generate robust packages, and distributes it across multiple distros and developers, whilst co-ordination and communication may prove a new challenge, I think this is complementary to what everyone is trying to achieve. </my2cents>
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
