Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation
Tim Yamin wrote: > Lately however, the "fun" and the motivation just hasn't been there > for the reasons I've outlined above; it's finally taken its toll, and > I believe the time to move onto new projects and ventures has finally > come for me. > > I would like to wish all of you the very best, and would like to thank > all of you who have (and haven't) made my time here so enjoyable. Tim, Thanks for all of the hard work you've put into Gentoo. I know it isn't always appreciated, so I want to make sure you know how valuable you've been. Thanks, Donnie signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: multiple inheritance support for profiles, Round 2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Andrew Gaffney wrote: > Are you proposing just adding the support or creating the new profiles > as well? If it's just the support, adding it into portage now certainly > won't hurt anything (unless someone really fscks up the current > single-parent cascaded profiles in the tree) and is probably a good idea. I'm only proposing that we add support to portage now because it seems like it will be useful in the future. How and when people make use of this support does not concern me much. Zac -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFKIE5/ejvha5XGaMRApbxAJ94JjcRroZFUcwwkWEDbNtw4J+fXQCeJGH0 KlPrgI4NoVJKSKMFnjKuQVA= =swdD -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Leave of Absence
I killed my dev box somehow and due to recent meandering thoughts in my head I've decided not to buy replacement parts. This in turn affects my ability to do Gentoo work; so I have decided to take a leave of absence. It's kind of been in my mind for while. Treecleaners, I will talk to you a bit about some thoughts I had. Devrel, this is your notice of my leave greater than 60 days. I will be reading e-mail, but prolly won't be present on IRC often. I'm hoping to finish strong in my last semester at school, the choices for post-graduation are looking like a full time job or JET; if the latter I will probably resign at that point since I know I won't have time to contribute much here anymore. -Alec -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: multiple inheritance support for profiles, Round 2
Zac Medico wrote: Some of you may recall that I proposed the addition of multiple inheritance to profiles a couple of months ago [1]. The idea is to extend the "parent" file in profiles so that it supports any number of parents (one per line). Parents listed closer to the bottom of the file will have the ability to override the settings of those listed nearer the top of file. As of portage-2.1 (included in the 2006.1 release media), portage will automatically generate an error if it encounters multiple inheritance (earlier versions would simply ignore anything after the first parent). As long as users follow the profile updating instructions [2] and update portage prior to a profile update, they won't have any trouble. However, if a user has <=portage-2.0* and fails to follow the upgrade instructions, portage may attempt to build and install packages without the entire profile being correctly parsed. Should we add multiple inheritance support now? The changes necessary to add this support are minimal and we can have this feature in portage-2.1.2 [3], which I estimate will be ready for a final release in approximately 3 to 5 weeks. Are you proposing just adding the support or creating the new profiles as well? If it's just the support, adding it into portage now certainly won't hurt anything (unless someone really fscks up the current single-parent cascaded profiles in the tree) and is probably a good idea. If you're talking about putting together the new profiles now as well, is it going to be a separate profile tree (much as default-linux/ was created for cascaded profiles)? Will it be directly under profiles/? default-linux/? -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project Today's lesson in political correctness: "Go asphyxiate on a phallus" -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] RFC: multiple inheritance support for profiles, Round 2
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi everyone, Some of you may recall that I proposed the addition of multiple inheritance to profiles a couple of months ago [1]. The idea is to extend the "parent" file in profiles so that it supports any number of parents (one per line). Parents listed closer to the bottom of the file will have the ability to override the settings of those listed nearer the top of file. As of portage-2.1 (included in the 2006.1 release media), portage will automatically generate an error if it encounters multiple inheritance (earlier versions would simply ignore anything after the first parent). As long as users follow the profile updating instructions [2] and update portage prior to a profile update, they won't have any trouble. However, if a user has <=portage-2.0* and fails to follow the upgrade instructions, portage may attempt to build and install packages without the entire profile being correctly parsed. Should we add multiple inheritance support now? The changes necessary to add this support are minimal and we can have this feature in portage-2.1.2 [3], which I estimate will be ready for a final release in approximately 3 to 5 weeks. Zac [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/41453 [2] http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-upgrading.xml#doc_chap3 [3] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=147007 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFKGrV/ejvha5XGaMRAv1iAKDNhz4CxfonP3nexIlu+SyRPRjffgCeNA76 GKHMg+DTMzHwBq0PPX6kV/U= =DcWj -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo World Domination. a 10 step guide
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 simply don't have enough developers to support the many projects that we have. Here are my ideas for fixing this problem: - Cut the number of packages in half (put the removed ebuilds in community run overlays) I doubt this'll work. I sorta see the portage tree like a starfish -- cut it in half, and within time, you get two starfish. Cut it into three parts, and you eventually get three starfish. You wind up back at square one with double the trouble and none of the fun. - Formal approval process (or at least strict criteria) for adding new packages This might work, but it depends on what criteria/process, and how well its enforced. - Make every dev a member of at least 1 arch team This won't work -- especially if the dev lacks access to the hardware. Some arches are so complex, you need several types of hardware. In mips, for example, if a dev's got access to a low-end box like an Indy or an O2, then letting them help out on basic keywording on common packages probably won't hurt, but it would be much better if they had access to say, more than one type of mips hardware (say, an Octane, and a Cobalt). Also, not every dev would want to have to maintain another box of some obscure/strange arch. It's opposite in my case -- I have 1 x86 box running Linux (not counting my main desktop since its in windows), and everything else is an SGI box (or my one cobalt). I've got spare parts lying around to build two more functional x86 systems, but I've never seen a need to put'em together and run them continuously. - Double the number of developers with aggressive recruiting This can become a slippery slope real fast. - Devs can only belong to 5 projects at most I can see this having its uses, but this is more of a personal thing on a per-dev basis. - Drop all arches and Gentoo/Alt projects except Linux on amd64, ppc32/64, sparc, and x86 Uh, no? Although we sometimes seem as inactive as hell, mips is very much an alive arch. We're a tad guilty of going off and doing our own thing sometimes, but then again, most of us are guilty of that at some point in our devship. I would instead opt for more interaction among archs, probably through dev sharing and such. sparc and mips share several developers (or did, I think I'm one of the few left), and encouraging more publicity for the lesser archs. I occasionally post an announcement about some neat new whizbang thing I do (like the X LiveCD for SGI systems I might post about tomorrow), and though I rarely see a response, I feel it gets the word out. - Reduce the number of projects by eliminating the dead, weak, understaffed, and unnecessary projects Depends on the definition of "unnecessary". - Project status reports once a month for every project Hmm, could be useful. Depends on whether one defines a report as needing to match some obscure DoD specification, or whether a simple paragraph or two works fine. --Kumba -- Gentoo/MIPS Team Lead "Such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are elsewhere." --Elrond -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proxy maintainers (was: Gentoo World Domination. a 10 step guide)
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 10:06:39 +0200 Natanael Copa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Because of gentoo devs always seems to fight? Don't get confused by all the flames. It's only 10-20 devs out of ~150 who are always fighting - and that's usually only on mailinglists, they work together quite well outside of certain "hot" mailinglist topics (day-to-day tree maintenance). Kind regards, -- Andrej "Ticho" Kacian Gentoo Linux Developer - net-mail, antivirus, sound, x86 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Another resignation
Hi, I think it's time for me to resign as a Gentoo developer. No bad blood or anything like that, I just realized that after being very active during 2005, in the last months I couldn't find time anymore for Gentoo development. Also, a month ago I moved from Italy to Los Angeles to work at UCLA (a really great experience for me), and after settling down I feel quite confident that my current activity won't leave me much spare time anytime soon... I wish you guys all the best, and I will continue to be a happy gentoo user from now on. In particular, I want to thank Carsten, Caleb, Dan, Diego for all the work they did and do for KDE, I'm sorry to leave you guys! Good luck. Gregorio -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] reminder: invalid usage of USE=static
please remember that using USE=static to control whether static libraries are installed is wrong packages that can install static and shared libraries should always be installing them -mike pgpHHzEifWBaO.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation
On Sat, Oct 07, 2006 at 09:19:14PM +, Tim Yamin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > All, > > I'm afraid that I find that my position with Gentoo is no longer > tenable. Over the past year and especially over the past few months > Sorry to see you leave. Good luck. tomaw. > pgpsUI71BNcK3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation
Hi Tim, Am Samstag, 7. Oktober 2006 23:19 schrieb Tim Yamin: > I'm afraid that I find that my position with Gentoo is no longer > tenable. Over the past year and especially over the past few months > the ability to keep Gentoo a coherent and smooth environment has been > eroded and hindered at practically every opportunity by bad > decisions, staff, and in some cases, downright incompetence. I'm sorry to see you go, but i cannot agree with you here. More below. > It transpires that from the recent barrage of developers leaving, the > disquiet and increasing lack of congruence of the developer (and to > some extent also the user) communities that something is inherently > wrong. I'm leaving it as an exercise to the reader to explore exactly > what (if anything) is wrong. Honestly, i think you're showing a weak shell here, but that's my personal opinion. QA and council asked you to do something you didn't like to do, and i still don't understand your reasoning. Please think about this decision over a week or so. Kloeri: Please don't file a retirement bug immediately. > Seeing as we have failed to address these challenges over the course > of many months and as a result of continuous recent discussions > (which half the time end up being totally redundant due to > miscommunication) both on -core and on -dev, it is evident that > something is wrong with the core management (or lack thereof, > depending on your point of view). > > I no longer have the commitment or desire to follow the road in > solving the above challenges. I'm not really sure whether there even > is a solution. I'd like to add that I have really enjoyed my time in > the past three years working with Gentoo and helping to contribute to > the then vibrant and dynamic community. As have I while working with you, especially and mainly in release engineering. > Lately however, the "fun" and the motivation just hasn't been there > for the reasons I've outlined above; it's finally taken its toll, and > I believe the time to move onto new projects and ventures has finally > come for me. As longas you stay away from microphones ;-) > I would like to wish all of you the very best, and would like to > thank all of you who have (and haven't) made my time here so > enjoyable. Thank you very much > So long, and thanks for all the fish... I think you oughta know that I'm feeling very depressed :-( Danny, who hopes to see you again next year! -- Danny van Dyk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Gentoo/AMD64 Project, Gentoo Scientific Project -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation
Tim Yamin wrote: So long, and thanks for all the fish... Tim. Well, I've already given you my best wishes for the future, but it can't hurt to do it twice :P Have fun doing whatever it is you'll be doing with yourself Take care, Peter Weller -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation
On 2006.10.07 22:19, Tim Yamin wrote: All, [snip] So long, and thanks for all the fish... Tim. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list Tim, I'm sorry to see you depart. Good luck for the future, see you around on irc. Regards, Roy Bamford (NeddySeagoon) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation
Tim Yamin wrote: I would like to wish all of you the very best, and would like to thank all of you who have (and haven't) made my time here so enjoyable. So long, and thanks for all the fish... I can't say this was unexpected, but I'm sorry to see you go. Are you going to continue to contribute to various projects you've worked on such as gk4? -- Andrew Gaffneyhttp://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/ Gentoo Linux Developer Installer Project Today's lesson in political correctness: "Go asphyxiate on a phallus" -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation
Hi Tim, On 10/7/06, Tim Yamin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I would like to wish all of you the very best, and would like to thank all of you who have (and haven't) made my time here so enjoyable. All the very best with whatever you do next. It's been a real pleasure working with you on Gentoo, and at the Gentoo UK conferences, and you'll be sorely missed. Best regards, Stu -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Resignation
All, I'm afraid that I find that my position with Gentoo is no longer tenable. Over the past year and especially over the past few months the ability to keep Gentoo a coherent and smooth environment has been eroded and hindered at practically every opportunity by bad decisions, staff, and in some cases, downright incompetence. It transpires that from the recent barrage of developers leaving, the disquiet and increasing lack of congruence of the developer (and to some extent also the user) communities that something is inherently wrong. I'm leaving it as an exercise to the reader to explore exactly what (if anything) is wrong. Seeing as we have failed to address these challenges over the course of many months and as a result of continuous recent discussions (which half the time end up being totally redundant due to miscommunication) both on -core and on -dev, it is evident that something is wrong with the core management (or lack thereof, depending on your point of view). I no longer have the commitment or desire to follow the road in solving the above challenges. I'm not really sure whether there even is a solution. I'd like to add that I have really enjoyed my time in the past three years working with Gentoo and helping to contribute to the then vibrant and dynamic community. Lately however, the "fun" and the motivation just hasn't been there for the reasons I've outlined above; it's finally taken its toll, and I believe the time to move onto new projects and ventures has finally come for me. I would like to wish all of you the very best, and would like to thank all of you who have (and haven't) made my time here so enjoyable. So long, and thanks for all the fish... Tim. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Re: New Developer: Alon Bar-Lev (alonbl)
Hi, it has been a pleasure to work with you through bugzilla. I am really glad you are a developer now - I will not have to commit anything for you anymore now ;) Best regards, - Stefan -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo World Domination. a 10 step guide
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 just care that whatever it is, it works. We work with the respective teams, but we leave it up to them what we use. It happens to work out quite well this way. Reports from teams such as Gnome and KDE would be more useful to users, I would think, than to most developers. Any developers that it would impact are likely already in the know. Again, the last thing that I want to do is enforce some arbitrary reporting where it isn't necessary. I do agree that it definitely is necessary in some places, though. It just isn't necessary ubiquitously. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee Gentoo Foundation signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc plans
On Fri, 2006-10-06 at 22:58 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Friday 06 October 2006 19:11, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > So we'll need to update the no-nptl profiles to be ~sys-libs/glibc-2.4 > > instead of >=sys-libs/glibc-2.4, obviously, but will there be any other > > changes necessary? > > i dont believe so ... glibc-2.4 does have linuxthreads, but via an untested > snapshot from around the 2.4 release time, so i'd rather just not support it default-linux/alpha/no-nptl and default-linux/x86/no-nptl updated... -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee Gentoo Foundation signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo World Domination. a 10 step guide
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 accordance with their own > plans. Like real life, these plans will have external dependencies on > $UPSTREAM, that Gentoo has little or no control over. Please stop assuming that Release Engineering has any control over what goes on in the tree. Not only do we not have any such control, we also do not *want* any such control. [snip] 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. I don't see how doing reporting improves their lives. After all, we put out four "reports" a year, two releases, and two meetings between the releases where we plan the next release. Anything more than that is wasteful. ;] -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Alpha/AMD64/x86 Architecture Teams Games Developer/Council Member/Foundation Trustee Gentoo Foundation Chris, I understand you don't have any control over what goes on in the tree. In Gentoo, nobody outside of the individual projects does. My post was not intended as a crit of yourself or the Release Engineering team. I replied in your part of the thread because Release Engineering are the obvious users of the mooted plans and reports. As long as Gentoo is organised as an anarchy, which I have seen work well in other groups, then the status quo is fine. If Gentoo is to be organised as a single project, then some bureaucracy to oil the wheels is needed. In turn, that would mean setting up a management body of some sort (not Release Engineering) but that's a whole new thread. No replies to that here please. Either organisation can work providing the contributors want it to make it work but there will always be some dissenters discussing change (change != improvement). That's a healthy sign in any group. Regards, Roy Bamford (NeddySeagoon) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
