Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo Council 2010/2011 - Nominations are now open
On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 8:36 PM, Ryan Hill dirtye...@gentoo.org wrote: I'd like to nominate betelgeuse, calchan, and ssuominen (no way you're getting out of here that easy). Thanks a lot for your confidence but I'll pass. Denis.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Tone in Gentoo
On 6/17/10 3:13 AM, Ben de Groot wrote: There was a mostly silent agreement between some teams, [...] This is very worrying. Such things should never be a silent agreement. This needs to be open and transparent. This is policy that needs to be explicit. +100 I think we should pay more attention to documenting important policies. It just happens too often when people are confused by something, and then somebody pops up and says it's obvious, see our unstated policy. This is not to be understood as an attempt to policy everything. No. I'd prefer to have less policies, but well documented and agreed on by everybody. Paweł signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
On 17.6.2010 2.00, Sebastian Pipping wrote: I would like to propose these fundamental changes to DevRel: Wrong mailing list. This thread belongs to gentoo-project. I also find it weird that you didn't consult the devrel alias before starting this thread but I have no objections to having discussions about how devrel works. Let's have any further discussion on the proper mailing list (I set Reply-To with the hopes of moving it there). Regards, Petteri
[gentoo-dev] Re: Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
Mike Frysinger posted on Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:41:21 -0400 as excerpted: On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Sebastian Pipping wrote: 4) Disallow membership with both the conflict resolution group and the council at the same time (as the council is where issues with devrel are taken to). i have yet to see this being necessary. the one or two times there was a conflict of interest, there was a minor discussion ahead of time and cleanly resolved. i.e. it isnt a problem There's also a practical problem in such a restriction. DevRel is understaffed. I've seen observations to the effect that most developers aren't interested in getting involved in that area, particularly in reference to the conflict resolution subgroup, and by the nature of the problem, this isn't likely to change. It's also quite true that those interested in the admin aspects including conflict resolution are likely to be drawn to both devrel and council. Based on the above, we're already picking from a limited subset. Do we /really/ want to restrict it further? /Can/ we restrict it further, without severe practical effects due to restricting the number of folks willing to run for either council or devrel, if not both? Will the result be a drop in the quality of candidates willing to run for either team? If there's five slots and only six people running, how much of a choice is there, really? What about if only three accept their nominations? Will that be the result, particularly if the other suggestions are implemented as well, and people are elected for devrel-conflictres directly? In an infinitely large group, with an infinite number of potential candidates and thus an infinite number willing to run, the idea has merit. As the group gets smaller, dangers appear. Is the group of Gentoo devels small enough, and self-selected enough against interest in this area, that the dangers cancel out or worse the positives? That I don't know, as I'm not a dev and certainly not on devrel or council, with the experience to say, but from various comments I've read over the years from those qualified to know, it's at minimum, a close call. Would anybody with better insight into these things care to comment? Perhaps I read into the various comments something that wasn't there, or maybe those making the comments were ill-informed themselves, or it may be that the problems are already corrected and it'd be fine now. I don't know, but I'm worried about it, thus this post. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master. Richard Stallman
[gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo Council 2010/2011 - Nominations are now open
Hi, Alex Legler a...@gentoo.org: On Sat, 5 Jun 2010 02:00:02 +0200, Torsten Veller t...@gentoo.org wrote: Hello fellow developers and users. Nominations for the Gentoo Council 2010/2011 are now open for the next two weeks (until 23:59 UTC, 18/06/2010). Chainsaw, Fauli and sping please. Thank you for the nomination, but my time does not allow me to attend the meetings, and I am stretched thin anyway and cannot do everything I want for the teams I am already in. V-Li -- Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode URL:http://www.faulhammer.org/ signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Tone in Gentoo
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 02:32:51 +0200 Sebastian Pipping sp...@gentoo.org wrote: I wouldn't feel to bad if Gentoo is widely recognized as the distribution with the most friendly community around in 2011. Wouldn't you rather it be recognised as the distribution with the best product? -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Tone in Gentoo
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 11:51 AM, Ciaran McCreesh ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 02:32:51 +0200 Sebastian Pipping sp...@gentoo.org wrote: I wouldn't feel to bad if Gentoo is widely recognized as the distribution with the most friendly community around in 2011. Wouldn't you rather it be recognised as the distribution with the best product? Wouldn't you agree that unless you're a genius who can understand the entire system upfront with just the bit of documentation out there, the support given, in this case by the community, is part of the product?
Re: [gentoo-dev] Tone in Gentoo
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 02:32:51 +0200 Sebastian Pippingsp...@gentoo.org wrote: I wouldn't feel to bad if Gentoo is widely recognized as the distribution with the most friendly community around in 2011. Wouldn't you rather it be recognised as the distribution with the best product? LOL I thought that was already the case. I just couldn't help but say that. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-dev] Tone in Gentoo
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:58:21 +0200 Auke Booij a...@tulcod.com wrote: Wouldn't you agree that unless you're a genius who can understand the entire system upfront with just the bit of documentation out there, the support given, in this case by the community, is part of the product? No. The community is what you fall back on when the product (of which the documentation is an important part) fails. The goal of the community should be to improve the product, not to perpetuate itself. -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Tone in Gentoo
On 17-06-2010 11:51, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 02:32:51 +0200 Sebastian Pipping sp...@gentoo.org wrote: I wouldn't feel to bad if Gentoo is widely recognized as the distribution with the most friendly community around in 2011. Wouldn't you rather it be recognised as the distribution with the best product? When I read that, the first question that was raised on me was: - The best product for what, whom? We can't simply put all possible Gentoo applications and users in one bag. Is it really good to think on Gentoo as a product? Can we do like Apple and treat our users like crap while still making them use our product? *No!* Unless we provide locking, GNU/Linux users will always have a choice. That choice can be to join the Gentoo community, or leave it. - Angelo
Re: [gentoo-dev] Tone in Gentoo
On 17-06-2010 12:08, Angelo Arrifano wrote: On 17-06-2010 11:51, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 02:32:51 +0200 Sebastian Pipping sp...@gentoo.org wrote: I wouldn't feel to bad if Gentoo is widely recognized as the distribution with the most friendly community around in 2011. Wouldn't you rather it be recognised as the distribution with the best product? When I read that, the first question that was raised on me was: - The best product for what, whom? We can't simply put all possible Gentoo applications and users in one bag. Is it really good to think on Gentoo as a product? Can we do like Apple and treat our users like crap while still making them use our product? *No!* Unless we provide locking, GNU/Linux users will always have a choice. That choice can be to join the Gentoo community, or leave it. - Angelo I apologize for replying to self but I felt we should all remember *what is Gentoo*. Or at least what it used to be.. http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/about.xml What is Gentoo? Gentoo is a free operating system based on either Linux or FreeBSD that can be automatically optimized and customized for just about any application or need. Extreme configurability, performance and a top-notch user and developer community are all hallmarks of the Gentoo experience. (...) *Of course, Gentoo is more than just the software it provides. It is a community built around a distribution* which is driven by more than 300 developers and thousands of users. The distribution project provides the means for the users to enjoy Gentoo: documentation, infrastructure (mailinglists, site, forums ...), release engineering, software porting, quality assurance, security followup, hardening and more.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Tone in Gentoo
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:08:05 +0200 Angelo Arrifano mik...@gentoo.org wrote: That choice can be to join the Gentoo community, or leave it. The choice can be to use Gentoo, or not use Gentoo. If using Gentoo means being required to use bugzilla, the mailing lists, forums and IRC, then Gentoo has huge scalability problems. Providing one on one support takes an awful lot of manpower; the goal should be to improve the distribution so that most people don't encounter many bugs and can get all the support they need from the documentation. Thus things like GLEP 42 news items: they're a way of avoiding having thousands of users running to get support because they don't know what to do when a large change happens. If you think the community's the important part, you'd do the opposite: you'd not provide upfront instructions, and would instead see big changes as an opportunity to persuade more users to participate in the community by trying to help each other. -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Tone in Gentoo
On 17-06-2010 12:08, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 11:58:21 +0200 Auke Booij a...@tulcod.com wrote: Wouldn't you agree that unless you're a genius who can understand the entire system upfront with just the bit of documentation out there, the support given, in this case by the community, is part of the product? No. The community is what you fall back on when the product (of which the documentation is an important part) fails. The goal of the community should be to improve the product, not to perpetuate itself. Sounds like we need to nuke our forums (oh wait..), nuke our IRC channels and create a direct phone line for end-user support. - Angelo
Re: [gentoo-dev] Tone in Gentoo
On 17-06-2010 12:17, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:08:05 +0200 Angelo Arrifano mik...@gentoo.org wrote: I had some text written here. Why did you just remove it like this? Next time, please write some kind of marker (...) to tell you did crop some text. That choice can be to join the Gentoo community, or leave it. The choice can be to use Gentoo, or not use Gentoo. If using Gentoo means being required to use bugzilla, the mailing lists, forums and IRC, then Gentoo has huge scalability problems. I believe using Gentoo means reading the handbook, read forums, bugs and learn from them.. That's what I felt when I read the Gentoo philosophy for the first time. Providing one on one support takes an awful lot of manpower; the goal should be to improve the distribution so that most people don't encounter many bugs and can get all the support they need from the documentation. Are we trying to make Gentoo some kind of ubuntu? Thus things like GLEP 42 news items: they're a way of avoiding having thousands of users running to get support because they don't know what to do when a large change happens. If you think the community's the important part, you'd do the opposite: you'd not provide upfront instructions, and would instead see big changes as an opportunity to persuade more users to participate in the community by trying to help each other. - Angelo, PS: I'm exceeding my email bulk-reply quotas for today. I don't want to flood the mailing list so I'll step back and leave other people express their opinion.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
4) Disallow membership with both the conflict resolution group and the council at the same time (as the council is where issues with devrel are taken to). Excellent point. Furthermore, in every Democratic foundation in this planet the authority entity is completely detached to the disciplinary one
Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion related with dropping keywords policy
El jue, 17-06-2010 a las 06:07 +0200, Jeroen Roovers escribió: On Fri, 11 Jun 2010 07:39:01 -0400 Joseph Jezak jos...@gentoo.org wrote: Your preferred method is exactly how (as a ppc keyworder) I like to see these kind of bugs handled. Dropping keywords makes an awful lot more work for us and hurts our users, especially since we're not always very prompt at handling bugs. Well, reasoning for the HPPA team, which maintains an architecture that is dying rather more quickly than PPC32 (which still has all kinds of embedded uses and so on),, in favour of IA64, I'd rather see dropped keywords than new profile entries, possibly with the keyworded ebuilds being gradually removed after an OK. That way I can make a choice to keep a package (set) for a bit or to stop supporting it immediately. In that case, could you then consider to un-CC from keywording bugs hppa team is not willing to fix? I think it would help a lot to clean the tree of old versions that are been kept as it's the inly keyworded on hppa Thanks a lot signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Does libtool really support parallel make installs?
El jue, 17-06-2010 a las 01:26 +0400, Peter Volkov escribió: В Срд, 16/06/2010 в 17:21 -0400, Mike Frysinger пишет: On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 4:16 PM, Peter Volkov wrote: В Срд, 16/06/2010 в 13:41 +0200, Pacho Ramos пишет: Trying to move the following bug to upstream: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=253862 AFAIR this was never libtool bug, but automake and with recent enough automake (1.10 for sure) everything should just work. this log shows automake-1.11.1: http://bugs.gentoo.org/attachment.cgi?id=231409 I mean there was bug in automake itself. Since package fails it is automake usage that is broken. I'll try to check that. Thanks Peter and Mike for your help on this :-) signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Tone in Gentoo
On 06/17/10 05:24, Jeroen Roovers wrote: Well, apart from explaining technical stuff[1] as in the example above, we could obviously explain how our developers work, how much most of them get payed for doing that, inform users of our services what they can and cannot expect to get. It sounds a bit like if we explained ourselves we could continue as is instead of improving processes on our side. Maybe it would improve the whole situation a bit but it pushes away resposibility to others and it wouldn't help developer to developer conflicts either. Maybe we can still make use of that idea. Best, Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council 2010/2011 - Nominations are now open
Hello! I would like to nominate phajdan.jr (Pawel Hajdan, Jr.). Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Tone in Gentoo
Ciaran, the mindset I hear in your mail sounds a lot more like (my understanding of) Exherbo than Gentoo. I would appreciate if you stayed on topic which is improving tone in Gentoo. Thanks. Best, Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
Jorge, On 06/17/10 02:33, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: 1) Make the list of subscribers to the devrel alias public I don't know what gave you the idea that the list of the Developer Relations project members is private. You can check the alias members directly by running grep devrel /var/mail/master.aliases on woodpecker and you can check the project members at http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/ I see. I didn't know about /var/mail/master.aliases. I assumed that I would have found it with something like find /var/mail/alias/ | grep devrel if it were public and thefore assumed it to be private. Sorry. [..] in my opinion choosing conflict resolution members by popularity is a very bad idea. In my understanding people voting on candidates for a conflict resolution team vote for them with faith they will do a good job on that position later. How come you expect that to be driven by popularity? Best, Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
Petteri, On 06/17/10 09:52, Petteri Räty wrote: Wrong mailing list. This thread belongs to gentoo-project. that's what I am referring to with tone in Gentoo. I want the other 80% of you on the council. In my opinion the DevRel topic is too important to hide it on a mailing list with a fraction of subscribers. I wrote here on purpose. Among the very first things a Gentoo dev learns is that the gentoo-project mailing list is a list for topics no one really cares about. If you ask me we should resolve that list and merge it into gentoo-dev. It's note a pure approach, but it could work better. I also find it weird that you didn't consult the devrel alias before starting this thread In my eyes these issues are something that the whole Gentoo project needs to know about and to decide upon, not DevRel itself. Especially discussing to replace the team of conflict resolvers with a group of elected people isn't something I expect to work well on an inner discussion with DevRel. My latest discussion with DevRel (and it's ending) may have added to it. Best, Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
Duncan, On 06/17/10 09:56, Duncan wrote: DevRel is understaffed. I've seen observations to the effect that most developers aren't interested in getting involved in that area, particularly in reference to the conflict resolution subgroup when I offered to join DevRel last time in reply to a thread called Devrel needs new members Petteri told me: The amount of interest has surprised me so I'll first need to talk with existing members to see how many makes sense to train in at this point. I'm unsure if that refered to conflict resolution, recruiting or both. Petteri? Best, Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council 2010/2011 - Nominations are now open
On 6/17/10 2:38 PM, Sebastian Pipping wrote: I would like to nominate phajdan.jr (Pawel Hajdan, Jr.). Thanks! I accept. :) You can see my manifesto at http://dev.gentoo.org/~phajdan.jr/council-manifesto-201006.xml. Paweł signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
On 17.6.2010 17.00, Sebastian Pipping wrote: Petteri, On 06/17/10 09:52, Petteri Räty wrote: Wrong mailing list. This thread belongs to gentoo-project. that's what I am referring to with tone in Gentoo. I want the other 80% of you on the council. We communicate in English but that doesn't mean we all the same cultural background. My native language doesn't do small talk and doesn't have a word for please. Of course when writing English I try use please when required by the other party but sugar coating wouldn't have changed what I wanted to communicate with my message. It would just increase the time needed to write the message and raise the risk of getting misunderstood. A short and to the point message is the easiest to understand. In my opinion the DevRel topic is too important to hide it on a mailing list with a fraction of subscribers. I wrote here on purpose. If a thing is important enough then you should use gentoo-dev-announce under the current rules. Regards, Petteri
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council 2010/2011 - Nominations are now open
I'd like to nominate Thomas tanderson Anderson. --- Wulf C. Krüger philant...@exherbo.org signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
On 17.6.2010 17.10, Sebastian Pipping wrote: Duncan, On 06/17/10 09:56, Duncan wrote: DevRel is understaffed. I've seen observations to the effect that most developers aren't interested in getting involved in that area, particularly in reference to the conflict resolution subgroup when I offered to join DevRel last time in reply to a thread called Devrel needs new members Petteri told me: The amount of interest has surprised me so I'll first need to talk with existing members to see how many makes sense to train in at this point. I'm unsure if that refered to conflict resolution, recruiting or both. Petteri? We had interest in all areas of DevRel operations. I know I am a bottle neck at the moment. I didn't actively seek this position but accepted nomination when asked to. Currently my priority are the three GSoC projects I am the project owner for. If other (older) DevRel members feel like training new members they are free to do so. Regards, Petteri
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
On 17 June 2010 17:45, Petteri Räty betelge...@gentoo.org wrote: We communicate in English but that doesn't mean we all the same cultural background. My native language doesn't do small talk and doesn't have a word for please. I'm sorry, but that is simply not true. Unless Finnish is not your native language. One of my Finnish friends (we've since lost touch) was one of the most chatty persons I've ever known. He may have been uncharacteristic for a Finn, but even so. Ole hyvä, don't blame it on your language. A short and to the point message is the easiest to understand. I like short and to the point too. But we run the risk of being misunderstood nonetheless. In my opinion the DevRel topic is too important to hide it on a mailing list with a fraction of subscribers. I wrote here on purpose. If a thing is important enough then you should use gentoo-dev-announce under the current rules. That's not a list meant for discussion. I think Sebastian made the right call here. Cheers, Ben
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
Let me cut out one or two pieces I consider very important: We communicate in English but that doesn't mean we all the same cultural background. My native language doesn't do small talk and doesn't have a word for please. Now of course this will cause friction. I've noticed it especially with germanic and slavic languages that are more terse than english. For example Sit down! is acceptable in all situations in german, but is slightly rude in english and brutally rude in french. There you'd say Would you please sit down? in most social situations, unless you want to anger someone. (German carries most of the difference in the inflection and doesn't need multiple phrases to express the same thing) You can extrapolate the friction this can and will cause. So unless someone actively personally insults me I'll just assume it got lost in translation. And there's little we can do about it because many people don't notice these translation issues or don't know english well enough to express themselves with the needed refinement. A short and to the point message is the easiest to understand. ... and the easiest to misunderstand. Either way we lose ;) Personally I think the tone has improved a lot over the last $timeunit, I also have my personal theory how that happened, but I don't want to be burnt as a heretic. So let's not get too hung up on single words, stop floodmailing and resume fixing bugs, mmmhkay? All the best, Patrick
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
On 17.6.2010 18.20, Ben de Groot wrote: On 17 June 2010 17:45, Petteri Räty betelge...@gentoo.org wrote: We communicate in English but that doesn't mean we all the same cultural background. My native language doesn't do small talk and doesn't have a word for please. I'm sorry, but that is simply not true. Unless Finnish is not your native language. One of my Finnish friends (we've since lost touch) was one of the most chatty persons I've ever known. He may have been uncharacteristic for a Finn, but even so. Ole hyvä, don't blame it on your language. Ole hyvä is not something you would use when ordering a beer: English: A beer, please. Finnish: Yksi olut. I didn't say Finns are not chatty. Among friends Finns can be very chatty. Do you consider Finnish communication the same as in US? That's not a list meant for discussion. I think Sebastian made the right call here. Under current rules you cross post with gentoo-dev-announce to gentoo-project and set Reply-To to gentoo-project. That is what I have been teaching all new recruits and will continue to do so until we change the rules (I am not against changing the rules if most people feel gentoo-project is not useful any more). Regards, Petteri
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Packages up for grabs -- xmerlin, yoswink, chtekk, omp, tantive, mueli, bluebird, hncaldwell, caleb
2010/6/8 José María nim...@gentoo.org On Tue, Jun 08, 2010 at 06:25:17PM +0200, Jeroen Roovers wrote: On Tue, 8 Jun 2010 13:14:07 +0200 José María Alonso nim...@gentoo.org wrote: I would be very pleased to maintain this package: app-doc/repodoc Is there any chance I can maintain this package?. What do I have to do?. You could provide unified patches to the ebuilds to fix the four outstanding bugs[1] with the package. Someone should CC themselves on those bugs who has commit access for the thing to work, of course. Maybe the live (-) ebuild could use some work too. Regards, jer [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=repodoc Thank you very much for pointing me in the right direction. I'll begin to work in those bugs. Cheers. Ok, then I won't mask this package for removal ( I was about to do it right now when I accidentally remembered this thread ) for now. If the bugs are still unresolved after 30 days I will have to mask it for removal. In the meantime, if you have working patches for the repodoc bugs [1], I can commit them for you and proxy this package for you until you gain tree access [1]: http://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=repodoc
Re: [gentoo-dev] Tone in Gentoo
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:20:34 +0200 Sebastian Pipping sp...@gentoo.org wrote: On 06/17/10 05:24, Jeroen Roovers wrote: Well, apart from explaining technical stuff[1] as in the example above, we could obviously explain how our developers work, how much most of them get payed for doing that, inform users of our services what they can and cannot expect to get. It sounds a bit like if we explained ourselves we could continue as is instead of improving processes on our side. Maybe it would improve the whole situation a bit [... ] Faced with users with little bug analysis/bug reporting/problem solving skills who merely exclaim that something is wrong, there's obviously a need to explain some of the basics. I guess that's not what this thread was initially about. :) [ ...] but it pushes away resposibility to others and it wouldn't help developer to developer conflicts either. Maybe we can still make use of that idea. I didn't intend to touch upon the subject of conflicts between developers and I am not going to. What you set out to discuss was the tone developers use that might scare away new users/developers.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion related with dropping keywords policy
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:04:42 +0200 Pacho Ramos pa...@gentoo.org wrote: In that case, could you then consider to un-CC from keywording bugs hppa team is not willing to fix? I think it would help a lot to clean the tree of old versions that are been kept as it's the inly keyworded on hppa Sounds like a plan. The problem I see is the amount of breakage that would cause in reverse dependencies, but can I hazard a guess that the greater desktop teams have ample compute power to resolve those? Regards, jer
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
On 2010.06.17 01:00, Sebastian Pipping wrote: Hello! [snip] Problem: Both betelgeuse and jmbsvicetto are DevRel members nominated for the upcoming council election. As I am also nominated proposing such rule could be understood aiming at decreasing their chances on the council and increasing mine as a result. However, as I propose to start over with a developer voted conflict resolution team this is not the case. The only implication is that if they make it to the council they cannot be elected for the conflict resolution team. DevRel is one of the most important things in Gentoo - we dependend on that working well. If you care about this please make yourself heard. Thanks, Sebastian Sebastian, You are suggesting that devrel/council members don't know of the conflict of interests beforehand and/or that they fail to disqualify themselves from an active part in either the devrel or council part of the proceedings. I admit that the possibility exists under present rules. Enforced division of responsibility can be a good thing in places but I'm not convinced that this is one of those places. That said, I would not want devrel to become a subset of council, nor council to become a subset of devrel. Its just for that reason that the Foundation bylaws forbid any individual serving as a trustee and on council at the same time. Maybe I am coming round to supporting your view after all. -- Regards, Roy Bamford (Neddyseagoon) a member of gentoo-ops forum-mods trustees
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
On 2010.06.17 01:00, Sebastian Pipping wrote: Hello! [snip] 3) Let Gentoo developers vote on who's in the conflict resolution team just like we do with the council. [snip] Thanks, Sebastian I'm against this idea - conflict resolution, I prefer the term mediation, is not something that the typical Gentoo developer is very good at. For sure, they have been involved in conflicts themselves but rarely, if ever, as a mediator. I think very few developers would stand for the role - its hard work ask any parent who has mediated between their offspring. I would prefer mediation to draw from a pool of volunteers, probably vetted by some trusted group and assigned to issues after their neutrality in any particular case had been determined by some method involving the protagonists. Elected mediators may well turn out to be unsuitable for the role. For myself, I would not stand for election to this role but I might volunteer to help out from time to time. -- Regards, Roy Bamford (Neddyseagoon) a member of gentoo-ops forum-mods trustees
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Tone in Gentoo
On 2010.06.16 23:33, Sebastian Pipping wrote: Roy, On 06/16/10 21:40, Roy Bamford wrote: As a native English speaker (from England) I view Jers reply as terse and to the point, completely lacking in tone. interesting. Looking at the sentence When did you point this out to devrel? I would like to say that while it's not impolite per se it's implicitly saying You _have to_ point this out to dev rel in my ears. A more or less word-by-word translation to German (Wann hast du das gegenüber DevRel angesprochen?) would make perfect sense and carry the same problem so I assume it's not an English language thing. In contrast asking Have you pointed this out to DevRel? What was their reaction? does not seem to have this mis-hearing problem, at least not to me. Hmm - thats interesting, I subconsciously read the two questions into the one posted. I accept you point. Its something I am likely to write myself without thinking about it too much too. I remember a guy of the German Unix User Group (GUUG) saying something like Communication is always oriented at the receiver. Communication is a two way process. On other more immediate media, that's reinforced as the receiver often asks questions to clarify the intent of the communication. That does not seem to happen as much in email so misunderstandings are more frequent and more damaging as they take longer to resolve. Applying that to tone and avoiding mis-interpretation the sender has the power (and arguably the responsiblity) to sounds as friendly as needed to be sure it will not be understood as unfriendly. In a way there's always a way to be friendlier - _without_ faking anything. Hmm - its quite possible to give offence without intending to. The receiver also has the power and responsibility to clarify the intent of the communication before concluding that it was intended in any particular manner. Best, Sebastian -- Regards, Roy Bamford (Neddyseagoon) a member of gentoo-ops forum-mods trustees
[gentoo-dev] [GSOC] Python, GSoC and distutils2
Greetings, I'm working on g-pypi2 project over this summer for Gentoo, and among other things, I learned a lot about how Gentoo handles Python package distributions. There are quite some students working on distutils2 implementations, so I thought Gentoo as source distribution has a lot to say how would upstream Python tools help towards better standard and API to make life just a little bit easier. I have put together a piratepad/etherpad for easier collaboration if anyone is willing to drop his thoughts how Python distribution of packages could be improved, follow the link http://piratepad.net/EIYOmjJKaJ .. read more about GSoC team http://bitbucket.org/tarek/distutils2/wiki/GSoC_2010_teams .. blog planet with reports http://teckla.idyll.org/~t/planet-distutils/ Cheers, Domen signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
Patrick, On 06/17/10 18:21, Patrick Lauer wrote: Now of course this will cause friction. I've noticed it especially with germanic and slavic languages that are more terse than english. For example Sit down! is acceptable in all situations in german, maybe acceptable, sure not polite or friendly. You can extrapolate the friction this can and will cause. So unless someone actively personally insults me I'll just assume it got lost in translation. I understand extrapolating friction as having the receiver fixing potential miscommunication. Is that what you meant? While it may work for you it's an inversion of responsibility again to me. I want Gentoo to be attractive to users without that skill, too. And there's little we can do about it because many people don't notice these translation issues or don't know english well enough to express themselves with the needed refinement. Things we can do include raising awareness and keep trying. So let's not get too hung up on single words, stop floodmailing and resume fixing bugs, mmmhkay? Are you asking me to shut up? In case floodmailing refers to me: I'm not done yet. We have more or less ignored non-technical issues for quite some time concentrating on technical issues as that's easier. The thing is: Technical things work much better in Gentoo than non-technical things. Let me repeat: Technical is not our main problem. Best, Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
Petteri, On 06/17/10 17:45, Petteri Räty wrote: We communicate in English but that doesn't mean we all the same cultural background. My native language doesn't do small talk and doesn't have a word for please. Of course when writing English I try use please when required by the other party but sugar coating wouldn't have changed what I wanted to communicate with my message. the point of this thread is not the introduction of sugar coating (pretending to be nice in my words) as you call it. To me it's about turning Gentoo into a friendly and helpful community. (So it's actually not just about tone but the things coming before the tone, too.) It would just increase the time needed to write the message and raise the risk of getting misunderstood. A short and to the point message is the easiest to understand. Yes, being friendly may take more words. Isn't it in your own best interest to have the other side not get pissed? Isn't that worth a few more words? Best, Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
On 06/17/10 22:09, Sebastian Pipping wrote: Patrick, On 06/17/10 18:21, Patrick Lauer wrote: Now of course this will cause friction. I've noticed it especially with germanic and slavic languages that are more terse than english. For example Sit down! is acceptable in all situations in german, maybe acceptable, sure not polite or friendly. Hey, komm, setz dich. Ey, du Arsch, setz dich, sonst schmeiss ich dich raus! exactly the same words, just defined by the context - and if you leave that away it's only intonation. The english or french equivalent ends up as different sentences ... You can extrapolate the friction this can and will cause. So unless someone actively personally insults me I'll just assume it got lost in translation. I understand extrapolating friction as having the receiver fixing potential miscommunication. Is that what you meant? I meant to say you can easily guess how much trouble that causes And here we see how difficult languages can be as you managed to get something quite different out of it ... [snip] So let's not get too hung up on single words, stop floodmailing and resume fixing bugs, mmmhkay? Are you asking me to shut up? In case floodmailing refers to me: I'm not done yet. You're one of the more persistent persons on the mailing lists. I don't see the point of arguing the same thing for days with no end in sight ... for me, personally, there are better ways to use my time. For example reading the quizzes my recruits are working on and pointing out the problems they still have. Or bugwrangling a bit just for fun. We have more or less ignored non-technical issues for quite some time concentrating on technical issues as that's easier. The thing is: Technical things work much better in Gentoo than non-technical things. Let me repeat: Technical is not our main problem. Ok then. What's the possible solutions? Which options do we have, what are their advantages and disadvantages? Why didn't we apply that solution before? Just complaining that things suck and life isn't fair won't help. Finding a goal and working towards it until you are done will. Have fun, Patrick
Re: [gentoo-dev] Adding AdobeFlash-10{,.1} licenses to EULA group
Am Mittwoch 16 Juni 2010, 14:45:21 schrieb Angelo Arrifano: On 16-06-2010 14:40, Jim Ramsay wrote: Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn chith...@gentoo.org wrote: I propose that this license be added to the EULA group. The previous AdobeFlash-10 license is similar in this regard, and could possibly also be added to that group. Agreed, on both points, and done. Thanks for finding and airing this issue! One notable section is 7.6 in which Adobe reserves the right to download and install additional Content Protection software on the user's PC. Not like anyone will actually *read* the license before adding it to their accept group, but if they did this would indeed be an important thing of which users should be aware. I defend it is our job to warn users about this kind of details. To me it sounds that a einfo at post-build phase would do the job, what do you guys think? Definitely yes! This is a very dangerous snippet in Adobe's license which should be pretty clearly pointed at to every user. -- Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C) Gentoo developer and bug-wrangler signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Adding AdobeFlash-10{,.1} licenses to EULA group
Lars Wendler wrote: Am Mittwoch 16 Juni 2010, 14:45:21 schrieb Angelo Arrifano: On 16-06-2010 14:40, Jim Ramsay wrote: Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễnchith...@gentoo.org wrote: I propose that this license be added to the EULA group. The previous AdobeFlash-10 license is similar in this regard, and could possibly also be added to that group. Agreed, on both points, and done. Thanks for finding and airing this issue! One notable section is 7.6 in which Adobe reserves the right to download and install additional Content Protection software on the user's PC. Not like anyone will actually *read* the license before adding it to their accept group, but if they did this would indeed be an important thing of which users should be aware. I defend it is our job to warn users about this kind of details. To me it sounds that a einfo at post-build phase would do the job, what do you guys think? Definitely yes! This is a very dangerous snippet in Adobe's license which should be pretty clearly pointed at to every user. Could that also include a alternative to adobe? If there is one. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-dev] Adding AdobeFlash-10{,.1} licenses to EULA group
Dale schrieb: One notable section is 7.6 in which Adobe reserves the right to download and install additional Content Protection software on the user's PC. Not like anyone will actually *read* the license before adding it to their accept group, but if they did this would indeed be an important thing of which users should be aware. I defend it is our job to warn users about this kind of details. To me it sounds that a einfo at post-build phase would do the job, what do you guys think? Though I am not opposed to adding a warning, I think the license mask is sufficient. If users demonstrate their indifference by setting ACCEPT_LICENSE=* or adding AdobeFlash-10.1 without reading the license, then I somehow doubt that elog messages will have an effect. Definitely yes! This is a very dangerous snippet in Adobe's license which should be pretty clearly pointed at to every user. Could that also include a alternative to adobe? If there is one. There are three open-source flash browser plugins in portage: - swfdec: development seems to have stalled - gnash: I have received mixed reports about the stability of the current version. The next release will include VA-API support and other improvements. - lightspark: a recent effort which is in its early stages and still incomplete in many ways (eg. audio support is planned for 0.4.2) None of them I consider good enough to replace adobe-flash for the average user. Regards, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
On 06/17/10 16:37, Sebastian Pipping wrote: I don't know what gave you the idea that the list of the Developer Relations project members is private. Also, Willinks reports the alias to be empty, unlike with other aliases: [00:44] sping expn devrel [00:44] willikins devrel = A question of rbu just made me remember ... Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Adding AdobeFlash-10{,.1} licenses to EULA group
Am Freitag 18 Juni 2010, 00:37:29 schrieb Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn: Dale schrieb: One notable section is 7.6 in which Adobe reserves the right to download and install additional Content Protection software on the user's PC. Not like anyone will actually *read* the license before adding it to their accept group, but if they did this would indeed be an important thing of which users should be aware. I defend it is our job to warn users about this kind of details. To me it sounds that a einfo at post-build phase would do the job, what do you guys think? Though I am not opposed to adding a warning, I think the license mask is sufficient. If users demonstrate their indifference by setting ACCEPT_LICENSE=* or adding AdobeFlash-10.1 without reading the license, then I somehow doubt that elog messages will have an effect. Maybe I'm quite alone with that but I have ACCEPT_LICENSE=* because I hate to edit my make.conf each time I try to emerge a package with yet another license that is missing in the variable. But I still watch for elog messages carefully after each merge. Definitely yes! This is a very dangerous snippet in Adobe's license which should be pretty clearly pointed at to every user. Could that also include a alternative to adobe? If there is one. There are three open-source flash browser plugins in portage: - swfdec: development seems to have stalled - gnash: I have received mixed reports about the stability of the current version. The next release will include VA-API support and other improvements. - lightspark: a recent effort which is in its early stages and still incomplete in many ways (eg. audio support is planned for 0.4.2) None of them I consider good enough to replace adobe-flash for the average user. Unfortunately yes. Especially now that Adobe fails to provide x86_64 users a non-vulnerable plugin I'd very much prefer to use an open-source replacement that for sure would be fixed much faster in case it's affected by some security vulnerability as well. One can only hope that flash finally vanishes from WWW now that HTML5 could become a good alternative... Regards, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn -- Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C) Gentoo developer and bug-wrangler signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 3:46 PM, Sebastian Pipping sp...@gentoo.org wrote: On 06/17/10 16:37, Sebastian Pipping wrote: I don't know what gave you the idea that the list of the Developer Relations project members is private. Also, Willinks reports the alias to be empty, unlike with other aliases: [00:44] sping expn devrel [00:44] willikins devrel = A question of rbu just made me remember ... This is an implementation detail of willikins (it only has access to a subset of aliases.) Note that the very existence of that command is based on a random comment I made about similar functionality I saw somewhere else. I don't think it was ever meant to be exhaustive, merely useful. I pointed out the /var/mail 'security problem' to robin sometime last year and IIRC he responded that he was aware of the master.aliases file and was fine with it being readable. Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
On 06/16/2010 08:33 PM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: On 17-06-2010 00:00, Sebastian Pipping wrote: 3) Let Gentoo developers vote on who's in the conflict resolution team just like we do with the council. AFAIK this never happened before and in my opinion choosing conflict resolution members by popularity is a very bad idea. Well, as long as the council remains the board of appeals and it is elected, I don't have a problem. I'd also go a step further and say that devrel members serve at the pleasure of the council. Some might debate that. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Adding AdobeFlash-10{,.1} licenses to EULA group
On Thu, Jun 17, 2010 at 05:14:16PM -0500, Dale wrote: Lars Wendler wrote: Am Mittwoch 16 Juni 2010, 14:45:21 schrieb Angelo Arrifano: On 16-06-2010 14:40, Jim Ramsay wrote: Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễnchith...@gentoo.org wrote: One notable section is 7.6 in which Adobe reserves the right to download and install additional Content Protection software on the user's PC. Not like anyone will actually *read* the license before adding it to their accept group, but if they did this would indeed be an important thing of which users should be aware. I defend it is our job to warn users about this kind of details. To me it sounds that a einfo at post-build phase would do the job, what do you guys think? Definitely yes! This is a very dangerous snippet in Adobe's license which should be pretty clearly pointed at to every user. Could that also include a alternative to adobe? If there is one. The place to advocate free alternatives (or upstreams that are nonsuck) isn't in einfo messages in ebuilds, it's on folks blogs or at best in metadata.xml... einfo should be this is the things to watch for in using this/setting it up not these guys are evil, use one of the free alternatives!. Grok? ~harring pgpVWMfI2alOt.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
Petteri Räty posted on Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:52:15 +0200 as excerpted: On 17.6.2010 17.10, Sebastian Pipping wrote: Duncan, On 06/17/10 09:56, Duncan wrote: DevRel is understaffed. I've seen observations to the effect that most developers aren't interested in getting involved in that area, particularly in reference to the conflict resolution subgroup when I offered to join DevRel last time in reply to a thread called Devrel needs new members Petteri told me: The amount of interest has surprised me so I'll first need to talk with existing members to see how many makes sense to train in at this point. Thanks. That's exactly the sort of answer I needed. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master. Richard Stallman
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Tone in Gentoo
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 20:29:13 +0100 Roy Bamford neddyseag...@gentoo.org wrote: Have you pointed this out to DevRel? What was their reaction? does not seem to have this mis-hearing problem, at least not to me. Hmm - thats interesting, I subconsciously read the two questions into the one posted. I accept you point. Its something I am likely to write myself without thinking about it too much too. Oh, this is a good one. Without introducing the problem, it is being assured that devrel has a problem because (some?) Gentoo users have a problem. So I ask very straightforwardly when this was pointed out to devrel, because I don't see the information being introduced to the wider public that has led to this public e-mail accusing devrel of not doing their job. Excuse me please, but how did I not turn out to ask the right question about the information that wasn't exposed on a public mailing list? And if I did put a vitriolic spin on it, then how would you sanctify your actions that bypassed normal procedure without actually at least summarising how that procedure ran to a dead end? Regards, jer
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposing fundamental changes to DevRel
On Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:47:34 +0100 Roy Bamford neddyseag...@gentoo.org wrote: I'm against this idea - conflict resolution, I prefer the term mediation, is not something that the typical Gentoo developer is very good at. For sure, they have been involved in conflicts themselves but rarely, if ever, as a mediator. I think very few developers would stand for the role - its hard work ask any parent who has mediated between their offspring. I would prefer mediation to draw from a pool of volunteers, probably vetted by some trusted group and assigned to issues after their neutrality in any particular case had been determined by some method involving the protagonists. Elected mediators may well turn out to be unsuitable for the role. The problem I see is that electing a pool of people to look into this means opening the proverbial cans of worms to a wider public that we have so far hidden away and resolved quietly. I would think that where devrel fails, if and when and so on, the higher authority to appeal to (the council) is already in place. But then you could join devrel as a volunteer, I gather. I wonder if that's what I should start doing now. jer
[gentoo-portage-dev] [API] First steps for creating an API for portage
Ok guys :) I think it has been consensus, that we need to define the operations everyone wants to be in the API. The following is currently only my point of view, but I'll represent it here also: Then a python-API is created which should allow for this set of operations. From this one could go and implement the library to make the API do something useful :) In parallel (or thereafter), we build the C-bindings. The API for these bindings probably look different -- but I guess they should be implemented in terms of the library created above. By example: - Operation: get the list of categories - Python-API: portage.api.categories() : Category list - Implementation: def categories(): return - C-API: category * categories() - C-Implementation: some wrapper around portage.api.categories So ... first step: Which operations do we need? - René signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
