Re: [gentoo-dev] The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
2010/7/5 Olivier Crête : > On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 18:15 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: >> which is trivial to fix and anyone with commit privs could have done. it >> certainly doesnt warrant a paniced "the sky is falling" message. > > I think this is a great occasion to dump our stupid custom crap and > switch to SystemD, PolicyKit, NetworkManager, etc. Anyone with half a > brain already dropped our stuff. And the lack of use of modern tools is > the reason I don't use Gentoo on my work computer anymore. > What you are saying makes sense for desktop users since they will likely already have consolekit/policykit/nm-applet installed, and hence using NetworkManager for all network management makes sense. However, this makes very little sense for people who install gentoo on servers. Requiring these things of them would be a disservice on our part (we're not fedora/ubuntu). And there is the issue that NetworkManager (aka NM) does not have any command line tools to control it (bring individual interfaces on/off, etc). cnetworkmanager exists, but it's third-party application, and I don't think it's that widely used/tested. >From what I can see, we have three options: (a) Make our existing openrc network code + openrc configuration files work with systemd, and move to systemd by default (b) Make systemd work with openrc+NM configuration files[1], make NM work w/o PK/CK[2], add command line tools to NM, and move to systemd by default. (c) Support systemd as an alternative init system for use by desktop users. I'd go with (c), personally, but if enough people are interested, they can pursue any of these options. 1. There's an ongoing GSoC project in Gentoo to make NM work with openrc's configuration files. It is proceeding quite successfully thanks to the excellent work of Mu Qiao. 2, PK == polkit, CK == consolekit -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 7:53 AM, Richard Freeman wrote: > On 07/04/2010 04:09 PM, Jory A. Pratt wrote: >> >> For those of you not on the #gentoo-dev channel, I just announced I am >> gonna be looking at the openrc code and fixing the bugs and working to >> continue the development. Anyone that is interested in helping please >> feel free to contact me off list to discuss how we will handle getting >> openrc back on track. >> > > Well, openrc isn't any worse than baselayout-1 for upstream support. > However, I do agree that we should strongly try to standardize on something > that is more cross-platform if possible. > > I'd rather not push to make openrc stable (which means lots of migration for > users), only to then move to something else anyway. Why have two migrations > when you can just have one? > The reason why people want to do an openrc migration right now is because we don't know when we'll find something else to move to; make it work with gentoo, make it work for everyone, iron out all the bugs, and push it to stable. In all probability, and looking at our past experience with pushing openrc to stable, it *will* take years. It's too much work to maintain both baselayout-1 *and* openrc *and* find something else to move to. It's best to move to openrc (which has numerous benefits over baselayout-1, and has a maintainer now), and then see what we can do. -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team
Re: [gentoo-dev] The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
On Sunday, July 04, 2010 21:03:41 Olivier Crête wrote: > On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 18:15 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > which is trivial to fix and anyone with commit privs could have done. it > > certainly doesnt warrant a paniced "the sky is falling" message. > > I think this is a great occasion to dump our stupid custom crap and > switch to SystemD, PolicyKit, NetworkManager, etc. Anyone with half a > brain already dropped our stuff. And the lack of use of modern tools is > the reason I don't use Gentoo on my work computer anymore. no one ever really carried Gentoo init.d scripts except for projects that were doing their development in Gentoo, so there really is no change here. as for the other init packages, you're certainly free to use whatever you want on your system. as for the rest, openrc doesnt conflict with PolicyKit or NetworkManager or anything else, nor does it prevent you from using those services at all. so statements carrying such implications are mere FUD. -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
On 07/04/2010 04:09 PM, Jory A. Pratt wrote: For those of you not on the #gentoo-dev channel, I just announced I am gonna be looking at the openrc code and fixing the bugs and working to continue the development. Anyone that is interested in helping please feel free to contact me off list to discuss how we will handle getting openrc back on track. Well, openrc isn't any worse than baselayout-1 for upstream support. However, I do agree that we should strongly try to standardize on something that is more cross-platform if possible. I'd rather not push to make openrc stable (which means lots of migration for users), only to then move to something else anyway. Why have two migrations when you can just have one? If Gentoo just wants to own openrc and not use something else long-term, then by all means let's get it done. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
On Sun, Jul 04, 2010 at 09:03:41PM -0400, Olivier Crrrte wrote: > On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 18:15 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > which is trivial to fix and anyone with commit privs could have done. it > > certainly doesnt warrant a paniced "the sky is falling" message. > > I think this is a great occasion to dump our stupid custom crap and > switch to SystemD, PolicyKit, NetworkManager, etc. Anyone with half a > brain already dropped our stuff. And the lack of use of modern tools is > the reason I don't use Gentoo on my work computer anymore. Requiring policykit, let alone networkmanager and dbus as a default is not something I'd personally agree with as a sane choice. If you're trying to build *just* a desktop distro, sure, it's sane. We're not however, thus invalidating those options from where I'm sitting. Regarding systemd, someone needs to do some pretty serious prototyping of it before it's even an option- on paper it looks rather promising. Paper != reality. With respect to systemd's upstream, someone has to do the legwork of proving it matches its hype- specifically that it is a good fit for gentoo. I'll skip the modern tools portion of the complaint, since that's just a bit ranty ;) ~harring pgpJLjhufxXDP.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 18:15 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > which is trivial to fix and anyone with commit privs could have done. it > certainly doesnt warrant a paniced "the sky is falling" message. I think this is a great occasion to dump our stupid custom crap and switch to SystemD, PolicyKit, NetworkManager, etc. Anyone with half a brain already dropped our stuff. And the lack of use of modern tools is the reason I don't use Gentoo on my work computer anymore. -- Olivier Crête tes...@gentoo.org Gentoo Developer signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[gentoo-dev] Automated Package Removal and Addition Tracker, for the week ending 2010-07-04 23h59 UTC
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed from the tree, for the week ending 2010-07-04 23h59 UTC. Removals: x11-misc/lintar 2010-06-30 09:36:40 hwoarang dev-java/struts-legacy 2010-06-30 21:06:47 caster Additions: net-irc/xchat-otr 2010-06-28 08:34:16 polynomial-c kde-misc/plasmatvgr 2010-06-28 09:00:21 hwoarang dev-util/molecule 2010-06-28 14:07:54 lxnay gnustep-apps/graphos2010-06-28 15:17:18 voyageur net-misc/pymazon2010-06-28 16:03:16 lack dev-libs/seed 2010-06-29 08:27:36 nirbheek www-misc/fcgiwrap 2010-06-29 13:17:59 pva net-libs/libisds2010-06-29 14:03:45 scarabeus media-sound/xmms2 2010-06-30 05:30:53 slyfox dev-libs/excelformat2010-06-30 09:13:22 jlec app-accessibility/festival-hts 2010-06-30 16:29:41 neurogeek sys-cluster/pacemaker 2010-07-01 10:10:21 xarthisius dev-scheme/termite 2010-07-01 17:34:38 chiiph app-text/skribe 2010-07-01 23:04:44 chiiph www-apps/wiliki 2010-07-02 00:21:32 chiiph dev-scheme/jscheme 2010-07-02 00:51:06 chiiph x11-misc/kapow 2010-07-02 08:04:19 ssuominen net-misc/pedro 2010-07-02 23:59:34 keri dev-ruby/bunny 2010-07-03 08:36:01 hollow dev-ruby/mixlib-log 2010-07-03 11:52:31 hollow dev-ruby/mixlib-authentication 2010-07-03 11:54:02 hollow dev-ruby/mixlib-config 2010-07-03 11:55:19 hollow dev-ruby/mixlib-cli 2010-07-03 11:58:53 hollow dev-ruby/moneta 2010-07-03 12:03:22 hollow dev-ruby/rest-client2010-07-03 12:05:00 hollow dev-ruby/systemu2010-07-03 12:08:44 hollow dev-ruby/ohai 2010-07-03 12:10:38 hollow dev-ruby/merb-core 2010-07-03 12:18:56 hollow dev-ruby/merb-assets2010-07-03 12:21:03 hollow dev-ruby/merb-helpers 2010-07-03 12:22:28 hollow dev-ruby/merb-haml 2010-07-03 12:23:50 hollow dev-ruby/merb-param-protection 2010-07-03 12:25:30 hollow dev-ruby/merb-slices2010-07-03 12:27:41 hollow app-admin/chef 2010-07-03 12:36:12 hollow app-admin/chef-server-api 2010-07-03 12:42:13 hollow app-admin/chef-server-webui 2010-07-03 12:47:24 hollow app-admin/chef-solr 2010-07-03 12:54:17 hollow app-admin/chef-server 2010-07-03 12:57:16 hollow sci-chemistry/phaser2010-07-03 13:32:41 jlec dev-python/numexpr 2010-07-03 21:10:15 xarthisius net-zope/record 2010-07-04 04:38:41 arfrever net-zope/missing2010-07-04 04:48:30 arfrever net-zope/threadlock 2010-07-04 04:56:40 arfrever net-zope/zope-mkzeoinstance 2010-07-04 05:15:53 arfrever net-zope/multimapping 2010-07-04 05:23:58 arfrever net-zope/initgroups 2010-07-04 05:41:42 arfrever -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 Removed Packages: x11-misc/lintar,removed,hwoarang,2010-06-30 09:36:40 dev-java/struts-legacy,removed,caster,2010-06-30 21:06:47 Added Packages: net-irc/xchat-otr,added,polynomial-c,2010-06-28 08:34:16 kde-misc/plasmatvgr,added,hwoarang,2010-06-28 09:00:21 dev-util/molecule,added,lxnay,2010-06-28 14:07:54 gnustep-apps/graphos,added,voyageur,2010-06-28 15:17:18 net-misc/pymazon,added,lack,2010-06-28 16:03:16 dev-libs/seed,added,nirbheek,2010-06-29 08:27:36 www-misc/fcgiwrap,added,pva,2010-06-29 13:17:59 net-libs/libisds,added,scarabeus,2010-06-29 14:03:45 media-sound/xmms2,added,slyfox,2010-06-30 05:30:53 dev-libs/excelformat,added,jlec,2010-06-30 09:13:22 app-accessibility/festival-hts,added,neurogeek,2010-06-30 16:29:41 sys-cluster/pacemaker,added,xarthisius,2010-07-01 10:10:21 dev-scheme/termite,added,chiiph,2010-07-01 17:34:38 app-text/skribe,added,chiiph,2010-07-01 23:04:44 www-apps/wiliki,added,chiiph,2010-07-02 00:21:32 dev-scheme/jscheme,added,chiiph,2010-07-02 00:51:06 x11-misc/kapow,added,ssuominen,2010-07-02 08:04:19 net-misc/pedro,added,keri,2010-07-02 23:59:34 dev-ruby/bunny,added,hollow,2010-07-03 08:36:01 dev-ruby/mixlib-log,added,hollow,2010-07-03 11:52:31 dev-ruby/mixlib-authentication,added,hollow,2010-07-03 11:54:02 dev-ruby/mixlib-config,added,hollow,2010-07-03 11:55:19 dev-ruby/mixlib-cli,added,hollow,2010-07-03 11:58:53 dev-ruby/moneta,added,hollow,2010-07-03 12:03:22 dev-ruby/rest-client,added,hollow,2010-07-03 12:05:00 dev-ruby/systemu,added,hollow,2010-07-03 12:08:44 dev-ruby/ohai,added,hollow,2010-07-03 12:10:38 dev-ruby/merb-core,added,hollow,2010-07-03 12:18:56 dev-ruby/merb-assets,added,hollow,20
Re: [gentoo-dev] The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
Am Montag 05 Juli 2010, 00:15:44 schrieb Mike Frysinger: > it > certainly doesnt warrant a paniced "the sky is falling" message. Which I was nowhere trying to imply. I just wanted to have this situation sorted out which now hopefully seems to be the case. -- Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C) Gentoo developer and bug-wrangler signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
On Sunday, July 04, 2010 18:04:29 Lars Wendler wrote: > Am Sonntag 04 Juli 2010, 23:02:39 schrieb Mike Frysinger: > > On Sunday, July 04, 2010 10:29:57 Lars Wendler wrote: > > > now that openrc has no active upstram anymore [1] what shall we do? To > > > be honest I was really looking forward for openrc/baselayout-2 finally > > > becoming stable in Gentoo but this seems to be quite implausible now > > > that openrc has no upstream anymore. > > > If there's anyone out there who would volunteer to maintain openrc, > > > please step up now or else I fear we must abandon openrc which would be > > > very sad. > > > > like i already told William a few months ago, it really doesnt matter. > > openrc was a Gentoo project to start with and since it is all based in > > git, there's nothing for us to do -- we already have an openrc git repo > > on the Gentoo git server. > > > > http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/openrc.git;a=summary > > Not very clear to anyone as metadata.xml still contains this snippet: which is trivial to fix and anyone with commit privs could have done. it certainly doesnt warrant a paniced "the sky is falling" message. -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
Am Sonntag 04 Juli 2010, 23:02:39 schrieb Mike Frysinger: > On Sunday, July 04, 2010 10:29:57 Lars Wendler wrote: > > now that openrc has no active upstram anymore [1] what shall we do? To be > > honest I was really looking forward for openrc/baselayout-2 finally > > becoming stable in Gentoo but this seems to be quite implausible now that > > openrc has no upstream anymore. > > If there's anyone out there who would volunteer to maintain openrc, > > please step up now or else I fear we must abandon openrc which would be > > very sad. > > like i already told William a few months ago, it really doesnt matter. > openrc was a Gentoo project to start with and since it is all based in > git, there's nothing for us to do -- we already have an openrc git repo on > the Gentoo git server. > > http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/openrc.git;a=summary > -mike Not very clear to anyone as metadata.xml still contains this snippet: r...@marples.name Roy Marples Upstream - please CC him on valid bugs -- Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C) Gentoo developer and bug-wrangler signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
On Sunday, July 04, 2010 10:29:57 Lars Wendler wrote: > now that openrc has no active upstram anymore [1] what shall we do? To be > honest I was really looking forward for openrc/baselayout-2 finally > becoming stable in Gentoo but this seems to be quite implausible now that > openrc has no upstream anymore. > If there's anyone out there who would volunteer to maintain openrc, please > step up now or else I fear we must abandon openrc which would be very sad. like i already told William a few months ago, it really doesnt matter. openrc was a Gentoo project to start with and since it is all based in git, there's nothing for us to do -- we already have an openrc git repo on the Gentoo git server. http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/openrc.git;a=summary -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 07/04/2010 02:39 PM, Ryan Hill wrote: > On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 17:17:25 +0200 > Fabio Erculiani wrote: > >> How are we supposed to handle the amount of installations out there >> that are using OpenRC then? >> OpenRC/bl-2 have proven to be a big improvement over the old stuff. I >> am for fixing current bugs, and keep it maintenance mode at least. >> I'm already spread over several things but I could give a hand to >> other devs willing to take over. > > > http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_21f716d5ffa6f04520e39d12fbe43452.xml > >> The only reason why OpenRC has not come up for stabilization by it's >> maintainers is the fact that everytime there's a new version readied >> for release, on the horizon there's new incompatible changes being >> planned for the next version. The OpenRC maintainers in Gentoo have >> always chosen to wait until OpenRC settles down a little bit. Now with >> the plan to drop support for certain features (ADSL and PPP support in >> the networking code), it's going to rewrite more Gentoo people to step >> up to develop and maintain this code. > > > I would say it's settled down now. > > I don't think stable can wait another 2-3 years on baselayout-1 while we > switch to yet another rc system. > > For those of you not on the #gentoo-dev channel, I just announced I am gonna be looking at the openrc code and fixing the bugs and working to continue the development. Anyone that is interested in helping please feel free to contact me off list to discuss how we will handle getting openrc back on track. - -- == Jory A. Pratt anarchy -at- gentoo.org Gentoo Mozilla Lead GPG: 2C1D 6AF9 F35D 5122 0E8F 9123 C270 3B43 5674 6127 == -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkww6okACgkQwnA7Q1Z0YSdhmQCgkKbxZtEX+xZ5EctZYMJ3gegR w30AnidMZVVlTY6OLJ2/vR8dr9wQ/lRD =F1WI -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] Re: The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
On Sun, 4 Jul 2010 17:17:25 +0200 Fabio Erculiani wrote: > How are we supposed to handle the amount of installations out there > that are using OpenRC then? > OpenRC/bl-2 have proven to be a big improvement over the old stuff. I > am for fixing current bugs, and keep it maintenance mode at least. > I'm already spread over several things but I could give a hand to > other devs willing to take over. http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_21f716d5ffa6f04520e39d12fbe43452.xml > The only reason why OpenRC has not come up for stabilization by it's > maintainers is the fact that everytime there's a new version readied > for release, on the horizon there's new incompatible changes being > planned for the next version. The OpenRC maintainers in Gentoo have > always chosen to wait until OpenRC settles down a little bit. Now with > the plan to drop support for certain features (ADSL and PPP support in > the networking code), it's going to rewrite more Gentoo people to step > up to develop and maintain this code. I would say it's settled down now. I don't think stable can wait another 2-3 years on baselayout-1 while we switch to yet another rc system. -- fonts, gcc-porting, and it's all by design toolchain, wxwidgetsto keep us from losing our minds @ gentoo.orgEFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
Nikos Chantziaras schrieb: > On 07/04/2010 05:29 PM, Lars Wendler wrote: >> now that openrc has no active upstram anymore [1] what shall we do? > How about switching to something that has a very active upstream? > http://bugs.gentoo.org/150190 I just want to throw in systemd: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=318365 http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd
Re: [gentoo-dev] The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
That would be the best but I wonder who has the time to even support this maintenance mode. We could ask for help from our user community. Maybe some of our users are quite familiar with the code and be able to pick up the load fast enough On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 6:17 PM, Fabio Erculiani wrote: > How are we supposed to handle the amount of installations out there > that are using OpenRC then? > OpenRC/bl-2 have proven to be a big improvement over the old stuff. I > am for fixing current bugs, and keep it maintenance mode at least. > I'm already spread over several things but I could give a hand to > other devs willing to take over. > > -- > Fabio Erculiani > http://www.sabayon.org > http://www.gentoo.org > >
Re: [gentoo-dev] The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
El dom, 04-07-2010 a las 16:29 +0200, Lars Wendler escribió: > Hi list, > > now that openrc has no active upstram anymore [1] what shall we do? To be > honest I was really looking forward for openrc/baselayout-2 finally becoming > stable in Gentoo but this seems to be quite implausible now that openrc has > no > upstream anymore. > If there's anyone out there who would volunteer to maintain openrc, please > step up now or else I fear we must abandon openrc which would be very sad. > > [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/326865 What is its status over current baselayout-1? I am still using last one, but seems that baselayout-2+openrc have some advantages over current stable, then, maybe we should stabilize it anyway (when possible) until a better replacement is found :-/ signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
[gentoo-dev] Re: Council Election Results
Hello fellow devs and Gentoo community,
in the 2010 Council election we had 270 eligable voters and 110
submitted votes, which corresponds to a turnout of about 41 %.
The full ranked list for this election is:
ferringb
halcy0n
jmbsvicetto
chainsaw
betelgeuse
scarabeus
wired
patrick
phajdan.jr
sping
_reopen_nominations
The complete result sheet is attached to this message.
Congratulations to the newly elected Council members. Thanks to all
nominees for running in the election and to all voters for their
participation.
On behalf of the election officials
Regards
Ulrich
_reopen_nominations
betelgeuse
chainsaw
ferringb
halcy0n
jmbsvicetto
patrick
phajdan.jr
scarabeus
sping
wired
_reop betel chain ferri halcy jmbsv patri phajd
scara sping wired
_reopen_nominations*** 17 9 15 11 10 39 25
18 37 19
betelgeuse 88*** 40 38 35 34 69 64
50 60 56
chainsaw 99 57*** 40 40 38 72 73
52 69 69
ferringb 92 57 49*** 47 49 76 76
60 72 71
halcy0n 96 51 54 46*** 46 78 79
63 72 76
jmbsvicetto100 55 55 48 42*** 71 78
58 77 76
patrick 68 28 27 24 23 25*** 54
36 55 47
phajdan.jr 81 32 17 25 21 21 46***
30 50 34
scarabeus 91 40 41 33 33 34 63 62
*** 61 53
sping 69 36 28 29 29 25 44 42
35*** 39
wired 88 40 23 29 27 24 56 48
33 56***
option _reopen_nominations is eliminated (betelgeuse trans-defeats
_reopen_nominations, and _reopen_nominations does not trans-defeat betelgeuse)
option betelgeuse is eliminated (chainsaw trans-defeats betelgeuse, and
betelgeuse does not trans-defeat chainsaw)
option chainsaw is eliminated (ferringb trans-defeats chainsaw, and chainsaw
does not trans-defeat ferringb)
option halcy0n is eliminated (ferringb trans-defeats halcy0n, and halcy0n does
not trans-defeat ferringb)
option jmbsvicetto is eliminated (ferringb trans-defeats jmbsvicetto, and
jmbsvicetto does not trans-defeat ferringb)
option patrick is eliminated (betelgeuse trans-defeats patrick, and patrick
does not trans-defeat betelgeuse)
option phajdan.jr is eliminated (betelgeuse trans-defeats phajdan.jr, and
phajdan.jr does not trans-defeat betelgeuse)
option scarabeus is eliminated (betelgeuse trans-defeats scarabeus, and
scarabeus does not trans-defeat betelgeuse)
option sping is eliminated (betelgeuse trans-defeats sping, and sping does not
trans-defeat betelgeuse)
option wired is eliminated (betelgeuse trans-defeats wired, and wired does not
trans-defeat betelgeuse)
the Schwartz set is {ferringb}
result: option ferringb wins
*** Running another pass to find the next winners... ***
_reop betel chain ferri halcy jmbsv patri phajd
scara sping wired
_reopen_nominations*** 17 9 15 11 10 39 25
18 37 19
betelgeuse 88*** 40 38 35 34 69 64
50 60 56
chainsaw 99 57*** 40 40 38 72 73
52 69 69
ferringb -1 -1 -1+++ -1 -1 -1 -1
-1 -1 -1
halcy0n 96 51 54 46*** 46 78 79
63 72 76
jmbsvicetto100 55 55 48 42*** 71 78
58 77 76
patrick 68 28 27 24 23 25*** 54
36 55 47
phajdan.jr 81 32 17 25 21 21 46***
30 50 34
scarabeus 91 40 41 33 33 34 63 62
*** 61 53
sping 69 36 28 29 29 25 44 42
35*** 39
wired 88 40 23 29 27 24 56 48
33 56***
option _reopen_nominations is eliminated (betelgeuse trans-defeats
_reopen_nominations, and _reopen_nominations does not trans-defeat betelgeuse)
option betelgeuse is eliminated (chainsaw trans-defeats betelgeuse, and
betelgeuse does not trans-defeat chainsaw)
option chainsaw is eliminated (halcy0n trans-defeats chainsaw, and chainsaw
does not trans-defeat halcy0n)
option jmbsvicetto is eliminated (halcy0n trans-defeats jmbsvicetto, and
jmbsvicetto does not trans-defeat halcy0n)
option patrick is eliminated (betelgeuse trans-defeats patrick, and patrick
does not trans-defeat betelgeuse)
option phajdan.jr is eliminated (betelgeuse
Re: [gentoo-dev] The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
How are we supposed to handle the amount of installations out there that are using OpenRC then? OpenRC/bl-2 have proven to be a big improvement over the old stuff. I am for fixing current bugs, and keep it maintenance mode at least. I'm already spread over several things but I could give a hand to other devs willing to take over. -- Fabio Erculiani http://www.sabayon.org http://www.gentoo.org
[gentoo-dev] Re: The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
On 07/04/2010 05:29 PM, Lars Wendler wrote: Hi list, now that openrc has no active upstram anymore [1] what shall we do? To be honest I was really looking forward for openrc/baselayout-2 finally becoming stable in Gentoo but this seems to be quite implausible now that openrc has no upstream anymore. If there's anyone out there who would volunteer to maintain openrc, please step up now or else I fear we must abandon openrc which would be very sad. How about switching to something that has a very active upstream? http://bugs.gentoo.org/150190
Re: [gentoo-dev] Council Election Results
Attached you may find the master-council ballot. Use it along with your confirmation number ( which you will receive shortly ) to confirm your ballot. Thank you, Markos On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 3:52 PM, Roy Bamford wrote: > > Team, > > The four election officials have determined that result of the 2010 > council election, in order of votes cast is :- > > Final ranked list: > ferringb > halcy0n > jmbsvicetto > chainsaw > betelgeuse > scarabeus > wired > patrick > phajdan.jr > sping > _reopen_nominations > > > On behalf of the election offcials > > -- > Regards, > > Roy Bamford > (Neddyseagoon) a member of > gentoo-ops > forum-mods > trustees > > master-council201006 Description: Binary data
[gentoo-dev] The future of sys-apps/openrc in Gentoo
Hi list, now that openrc has no active upstram anymore [1] what shall we do? To be honest I was really looking forward for openrc/baselayout-2 finally becoming stable in Gentoo but this seems to be quite implausible now that openrc has no upstream anymore. If there's anyone out there who would volunteer to maintain openrc, please step up now or else I fear we must abandon openrc which would be very sad. [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/326865 -- Lars Wendler (Polynomial-C) Gentoo developer and bug-wrangler signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[gentoo-dev] Council Election Results
Team, The four election officials have determined that result of the 2010 council election, in order of votes cast is :- Final ranked list: ferringb halcy0n jmbsvicetto chainsaw betelgeuse scarabeus wired patrick phajdan.jr sping _reopen_nominations On behalf of the election offcials -- Regards, Roy Bamford (Neddyseagoon) a member of gentoo-ops forum-mods trustees
[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-ruby/bunny: metadata.xml ChangeLog bunny-0.6.0.ebuild
On Sat, 2010-07-03 at 08:36 +, Benedikt Boehm (hollow) wrote: > hollow 10/07/03 08:36:01 > > Added:metadata.xml ChangeLog bunny-0.6.0.ebuild > Log: > initial ebuild, thanks to Gábor Vészi > (Portage version: 2.2_rc67/cvs/Linux i686) Does not install documentation. Does not install examples. Does not run specs. Please fix. Hans signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
