On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 15:09:06 +0200
Natanael Copa [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What you didn't need to be a gentoo dev to be a package maintainer?
Lets say anyone could be marked as maintainer in an ebuild. When
there is a bug, the package maintainer fixes the bug and submits an
updated
On 2006.10.07 00:26, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Fri, 2006-10-06 at 10:24 +0100, Roy Bamford wrote:
Before you can have useful reports, you need a plan to report
against.
Like a target date for 2007.0 and its contents. Such a plan depends
on
other projects delivering the contents in
On Sat, 2006-10-07 at 09:58 +0100, Roy Bamford wrote:
I replied in your part of the thread because Release Engineering are
the obvious users of the mooted plans and reports.
That was kinda my point. We aren't. We really don't care what version
of Gnome/KDE/kernel get in the release. We
Thomas Cort wrote:
There have been a number of developers leaving Gentoo in the past 6
months as well as a number of news stories on DistroWatch, Slashdot,
LWN, and others about Gentoo's internal problems. No one seems to have
pin pointed the problem, but it seems glaringly obvious to me. We
On 2006.10.04 15:27, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
[snip]
I'll give you Release Engineering's status reports for September,
October, and November:
September: taking a well-deserved break
October: taking a well-deserved break
November: taking a well-deserved break
How about other projects that
On Saturday 07 October 2006 01:26, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
I'll be honest, Release Engineering work is *very* stressful. My
primary goal as the lead is to try to come up with ways to make working
on a release easier for the guys doing the work.
If anyone had still any doubt about this, he can
On 10/7/06, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If anyone had still any doubt about this, he can easily try to tweak a
release :P
I've been doing releng-like work lately to build Gentoo/FreeBSD stages with
catalyst and I have to say that releng is doing a heck of an hard job to
On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 00:00 +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote:
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 17:13 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
With the increase in developer and project overlays, I see the
possibility for reducing work needed to maintain many packages. As
Natanael Copa, it would be nice for him to
Natanael Copa wrote:
Nobody has ever showed interest and I'm not pushing my services on
anyone.
Why exactly you don't want to become a Gentoo dev? The whole proxy
maintainer thing is a bunch of crap. The Gentoo developer will still be
expected to be responsible of his/her commits, which
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 13:20 -0400, Caleb Tennis wrote:
With the increase in developer and project overlays, I see the
possibility for reducing work needed to maintain many packages. As
Natanael Copa, it would be nice for him to be able to maintain packages
without having
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 11:44:07 -0400
Thomas Cort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/4/06, Kevin F. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 09:41:45 -0400
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My view is that while they're being actively supported, there's no
reason to remove them.
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 11:44:07 -0400
Thomas Cort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/4/06, Kevin F. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 09:41:45 -0400
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My view is that while they're being actively supported, there's no
reason to remove them.
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 11:39:07 -0400
Thomas Cort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/4/06, Kevin F. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 09:21:08 -0400
Thomas Cort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The minority arches like mips, sparc etc seem to get along
quite happily.
Not the
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 12:52:14 +0200 Kevin F. Quinn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Minority arches don't affect devs who aren't interested in them
Actually, they do. Minority archs lead to much better tree QA being
done, more bugs in packages being identified and more ebuild and
package bugs being
On Thursday 05 October 2006 13:48, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Actually, they do. Minority archs lead to much better tree QA being
done, more bugs in packages being identified and more ebuild and
package bugs being fixed.
Hell is gonna break loose, I agree with Ciaran!
--
Diego Flameeyes Pettenò -
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Thursday 05 October 2006 13:48, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Actually, they do. Minority archs lead to much better tree QA being
done, more bugs in packages being identified and more ebuild and
package bugs being fixed.
Hell is gonna break loose, I agree with
On Thursday 05 October 2006 14:04, Luca Barbato wrote:
Not today, not today, 1/2 of the devils are on a strike because of the
recent freezes in the latest months, the others are still recovering
from the flu caused by the change in the climate...
What if I call as a reinforcement the BSD
On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 09:52 +0300, Alin Nastac wrote:
Natanael Copa wrote:
Nobody has ever showed interest and I'm not pushing my services on
anyone.
Why exactly you don't want to become a Gentoo dev? The whole proxy
maintainer thing is a bunch of crap. The Gentoo developer will still
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Thursday 05 October 2006 14:04, Luca Barbato wrote:
Not today, not today, 1/2 of the devils are on a strike because of the
recent freezes in the latest months, the others are still recovering
from the flu caused by the change in the climate...
What if I
On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 12:48 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 12:52:14 +0200 Kevin F. Quinn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Minority arches don't affect devs who aren't interested in them
Actually, they do. Minority archs lead to much better tree QA being
done, more bugs in
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 22:00 -0400, Mike Kelly wrote:
I don't *want* to drown projects in bureaucracy and paperwork. I want
them to *accomplish* things, instead.
Sending a brief All's well with releng email isn't exactly what I
would call drowning in bureaucracy.
Of course not, but that's
On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 09:52 +0300, Alin Nastac wrote:
Natanael Copa wrote:
Nobody has ever showed interest and I'm not pushing my services on
anyone.
Why exactly you don't want to become a Gentoo dev? The whole proxy
maintainer thing is a bunch of crap. The Gentoo developer will still
On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 08:34 +0200, Natanael Copa wrote:
If the proxy maintainer is specified as contact person in the ebuild,
and will be added to the CC list on bugs posted, the official developer
will not need to care about it until he gets a response from the proxy
developer.
Well, look at
On 2006.10.04 13:15, Brandon Low wrote:
As usual, sweeping new policies or procedures WILL NOT FIX THINGS.
[snip]
--Brandon
Since I have been a Gentoo user, there have been two completely
different management styles in use. When drobbins was around, he was
like the MD and Gentoo was
There have been a number of developers leaving Gentoo in the past 6
months as well as a number of news stories on DistroWatch, Slashdot,
LWN, and others about Gentoo's internal problems. No one seems to have
pin pointed the problem, but it seems glaringly obvious to me. We
simply don't have enough
On Wednesday 04 October 2006 13:00, Thomas Cort wrote:
- Drop all arches and Gentoo/Alt projects except Linux on amd64,
ppc32/64, sparc, and x86
I would say to drop everything bug sparc and ppc64, that seems to be the only
arch teams that actually respond in a timely fashion to keywording
Thomas Cort wrote:
There have been a number of developers leaving Gentoo in the past 6
months as well as a number of news stories on DistroWatch, Slashdot,
LWN, and others about Gentoo's internal problems. No one seems to have
pin pointed the problem, but it seems glaringly obvious to me. We
On Wednesday, 04. October. 2006 13:00, Thomas Cort wrote:
There have been a number of developers leaving Gentoo in the past 6
months as well as a number of news stories on DistroWatch, Slashdot,
LWN, and others about Gentoo's internal problems. No one seems to have
pin pointed the problem, but
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 07:00:14 -0400 Thomas Cort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| - Double the number of developers with aggressive recruiting
Aggressive recruiting isn't going to find you more competent people.
All it's going to do is increase the moron quotient from its current
50% to 75%.
| - Reduce
Thomas Cort wrote:
There have been a number of developers leaving Gentoo in the past 6
months as well as a number of news stories on DistroWatch, Slashdot,
LWN, and others about Gentoo's internal problems.
People come and go, I still see Gentoo going forward, packages still get
updated, work
Christian Heim wrote:
- Make every dev a member of at least 1 arch team
I think that would solve the understaffing of some of the arch teams (iirc
amd64 and x86 are having enough devs / at's right now)
No. We don't need more people on our dev lists, because it won't change
anything. What
As usual, sweeping new policies or procedures WILL NOT FIX THINGS.
Pretty much every commercial enterprize learns this eventually. New
rules from above don't fix problems, peolpe fix problems from below.
Gentoo has always been about close cooperation between core devs, new
devs and non devs. I
Thomas Cort wrote:
- Cut the number of packages in half (put the removed ebuilds in
community run overlays)
Removing part of the market will make us weaker, not stronger.
- Formal approval process (or at least strict criteria) for adding
new packages
Though I doubt bureaucracy will help,
On 10/4/06, Christian Heim [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday, 04. October. 2006 13:00, Thomas Cort wrote:
- Devs can only belong to 5 projects at most
Reducing the stress on people ? No clue what that would solve.
There are developers who belong to many projects and do very little or
On 10/4/06, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 07:00:14 -0400 Thomas Cort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| - Double the number of developers with aggressive recruiting
Aggressive recruiting isn't going to find you more competent people.
All it's going to do is increase the
Hi, everyone.
I'm not gentoo dev (yet), but I take the chance to vent an idea I have a
while, based on my personal experience in bugzilla.
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 07:15 -0500, Brandon Low wrote:
What if the problem is too many devs instead of too few? Slackware
Linux is a comparatively simple
On 10/4/06, Luca Longinotti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People come and go, I still see Gentoo going forward, packages still get
updated, work gets done
The number of opened bugs has always been higher than the number of
closed bugs in the bug stats listed in every 2006 GWN. How is this
'going
On 10/4/06, Brandon Low [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What if the problem is too many devs instead of too few? Slackware
Linux is a comparatively simple to maintain distribution, but ONE person
does it. How many devs are on Gentoo now? 200? more? A close knit
group of college students and bored
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 15:02:17 +0200 Kevin F. Quinn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Yuck. Devs should be free to add whatever packages they like,
| provided they're willing to maintain them.
There're already some restrictions:
The minority arches like mips, sparc etc seem to get along quite happily.
Not the minority arches like m68k, s390, alpha, ...
- Reduce the number of projects by eliminating the dead, weak,
understaffed, and unnecessary projects
Weak: Be more specific. What are the weak projects, and why?
Okay, I didn't want to answer anymore to this thread because I really find it
suited for April 1st, not October 4th, but seems like I cannot...
On Wednesday 04 October 2006 15:10, Thomas Cort wrote:
I was thinking something similar to what Ubuntu does,
they provide the basics to do most
On Wednesday 04 October 2006 15:14, Thomas Cort wrote:
On Gentoo we have to provide support for each possible combination of
USE flags, CFLAGS, and compiler versions on 32-bit and 64-bit systems,
on little endian and big endian systems, and with mix of stable and
testing packages. Slackware
Thomas Cort wrote:
The number of opened bugs has always been higher than the number of
closed bugs in the bug stats listed in every 2006 GWN. How is this
'going forward'? It seems to me like we are falling behind.
Take a closer look at the statistics. The numbers seem drastic, but once
you've
On 10/4/06, Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- No competing projects
do we have any competing projects now?
I believe seeds competes with releng (since they both want to release
stage tarballs). Some people don't believe that the two projects
compete, but it isn't up for discussion in
Thomas Cort wrote:
On 10/4/06, Luca Longinotti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The number of opened bugs has always been higher than the number of
closed bugs in the bug stats listed in every 2006 GWN. How is this
'going forward'? It seems to me like we are falling behind.
That's not an indicator
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 07:00 -0400, Thomas Cort wrote:
There have been a number of developers leaving Gentoo in the past 6
months as well as a number of news stories on DistroWatch, Slashdot,
LWN, and others about Gentoo's internal problems. No one seems to have
pin pointed the problem, but it
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thomas Cort wrote:
[. . ]
My, that's an awful lot of work on top of everything else we have to do. D'you
plan on getting us all paid, as well? That'd be motivation to stay and be even
more productive.
Also, it's not necessary for every dev to also
- Project status reports once a month for every project
Totally agree on this one!
OK.
I'll give you Release Engineering's status reports for September,
October, and November:
September: taking a well-deserved break
October: taking a well-deserved break
November: taking a well-deserved
On Wednesday 04 October 2006 07:21, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
I would say to drop everything bug sparc and ppc64, that seems to be the
only arch teams that actually respond in a timely fashion to keywording
requests.
too bad sparc is tied to old kernels and ppc64 toolchain is useless
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
- Project status reports once a month for every project
Totally agree on this one!
OK.
I'll give you Release Engineering's status reports for September,
October, and November:
September: taking a well-deserved break
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 07:15 -0500, Brandon Low wrote:
Remember when committing a big bug into the tree just wasn't that big of
a deal, because it'd get fixed soon, and the people who updated often
enough to care in the meantime would just laugh about it with you in
#gentoo?
This is definitely
- Double the number of developers with aggressive recruiting
Why do people think that this is a good idea? I have a different one.
How about we *half* the number of developers, keeping the people who do
the most work, and let everyone else contribute as members of the
community? Having
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 14:18:54 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 15:02:17 +0200 Kevin F. Quinn
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Yuck. Devs should be free to add whatever packages they like,
| provided they're willing to maintain them.
There're already some
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 09:21:08 -0400
Thomas Cort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The minority arches like mips, sparc etc seem to get along quite
happily.
Not the minority arches like m68k, s390, alpha, ...
I haven't seen any significant numbers of complaints. What exactly
about those arches do
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 15:34 +0200, Simon Stelling wrote:
What happened to working together? Should we work together instead of
competing against each other?
Sometimes you want to achieve the same goal by totally different means.
Sometimes there are good reasons for a complete new start.
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 09:41:45 -0400
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thomas Cort wrote:
- Drop all arches and Gentoo/Alt projects except Linux on amd64,
ppc32/64, sparc, and x86
I can perhaps see some of this stuff dying. Like all of SPanKY's
weird ass arches; I have no idea why they
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 10:38 -0400, Thomas Cort wrote:
- Double the number of developers with aggressive recruiting
Why do people think that this is a good idea? I have a different one.
How about we *half* the number of developers, keeping the people who do
the most work, and let
On Wednesday 04 October 2006 17:10, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
At the same time,
I dislike us having so much competition internally, as I think it
helps to foster some of the conflict and ill will that many of us have
towards each other.
It probably depends to which level of competition we're
On 10/4/06, Kevin F. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 09:21:08 -0400
Thomas Cort [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The minority arches like mips, sparc etc seem to get along quite
happily.
Not the minority arches like m68k, s390, alpha, ...
I haven't seen any significant numbers
Basically, the person doing one or two commits a month *do not* need CVS
access. They can still *contribute* at their current pace without
having CVS access and a nice @gentoo.org email address.
Sorry, but as a dev who has lurked in the shadows for a long time, this
simply isn't globally
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
Let's see, about 400 packages are handled by KDE herd. Not sure how many are
currently handled by X11 herd after modular Xorg was addded,
Around 300, by Josh and me. The number of packages is completely
irrelevant on its own, you need to combine it with the
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Now, perhaps what everyone would like, instead, would be status reports
*where necessary* from certain projects?
In fact, the council has been discussing asking a few projects about the
status on some of their tasks. The main reason for this is for
communications
Thomas Cort wrote:
Unnecessary: again, be more specific. What are the unnecessary
projects, and why?
Projects that aren't needed to further Gentoo and are not helpful to
users or developers.
Since Gentoo doesn't have any global goals, it's impossible to tell
what's furthering them and what
Thomas Cort wrote:
I mainly wrote No competing projects because there aren't any rules
preventing competing projects. Since top level projects don't need
discussion or formal approval from anyone, any dev could make their
own Gentoo/x86 project. I think that's crazy.
Sure, you could in
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 10:27:17AM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Here's the games team's status reports for every month:
Fixed more bugs, added more packages, cleaned up some ebuilds.
You forgot to mention the weekly team meeting including a motivational
speech. Shame on you!
Apart from
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 07:15:16AM -0500, Brandon Low wrote:
As usual, sweeping new policies or procedures WILL NOT FIX THINGS.
I fully agree to this.
While some of the ideas may be good, and some not, each of them should
be discussed seperately and eventually something good will come out of
it.
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Now, perhaps what everyone would like, instead, would be status reports
*where necessary* from certain projects?
In fact, the council has been discussing asking a few projects about the
status on some of their tasks. The main reason for this is
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 13:20 -0400, Caleb Tennis wrote:
Basically, the person doing one or two commits a month *do not* need CVS
access. They can still *contribute* at their current pace without
having CVS access and a nice @gentoo.org email address.
Sorry, but as a dev who has lurked in
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 12:21 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Now, perhaps what everyone would like, instead, would be status reports
*where necessary* from certain projects?
In fact, the council has been discussing asking a few projects about
On 10/4/06, Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 12:21 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Now, perhaps what everyone would like, instead, would be status reports
*where necessary* from certain projects?
In fact, the
On 10/4/06, Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Work is done in the overlays, tested, improved, then committed
into the main tree once the kinks have been worked out. We get a
stronger core tree with fewer developers and a better interaction with
the community.
And a Gentoo that's so
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 10:36:37AM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 07:15 -0500, Brandon Low wrote:
What if the problem is too many devs instead of too few? Slackware
Linux is a comparatively simple to maintain distribution, but ONE person
does it. How many devs are on
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 17:13 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
With the increase in developer and project overlays, I see the
possibility for reducing work needed to maintain many packages. As
Natanael Copa, it would be nice for him to be able to maintain packages
without having CVS access. The
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 09:46:31 -0400
Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
too bad sparc is tied to old kernels and ppc64 toolchain is useless
Depends on your sparc64 box. Most of them are fairly stable now. Its
just the SBUS boxes and some of the pricier hardware that may be
problematic.
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 10:27:17 -0400
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Project status reports once a month for every project
Totally agree on this one!
OK.
I'll give you Release Engineering's status reports for September,
October, and November:
September: taking a
75 matches
Mail list logo
