Re: how to contribute to use/slot deps: was Re: [gentoo-dev] Multiple Repo Support
On Sunday 25 December 2005 02:33, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 23:56:37 -0800 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > | It's really pretty simple- get off your butt and chip in if you want > | it, else you're on _our_ timeline (eg, we implement it when we deem > | it sane/ready to go). > > Is Portage development done to support the needs of those of us who > provide the tree, or is the tree expected to be restricted to whatever > Portage developers feel like implementing? Neither. At least for myself, portage development is done to prioritized according to what I see as the needs of users. Needs of "those of us who provide the tree" are prioritized by how much benefit will be translated to end users combined with how much work will be required. -- Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: how to contribute to use/slot deps: was Re: [gentoo-dev] Multiple Repo Support
On Sat, Dec 24, 2005 at 05:33:06PM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 23:56:37 -0800 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > | It's really pretty simple- get off your butt and chip in if you want > | it, else you're on _our_ timeline (eg, we implement it when we deem > | it sane/ready to go). > > Is Portage development done to support the needs of those of us who > provide the tree, or is the tree expected to be restricted to whatever > Portage developers feel like implementing? Personally, I'd state anyone who thinks we're implementing only what we find fun to do is trolling something fierce, but I'm also a portage dev thus my views are a bit different. Regardless, ciaran's own statement via irc "that the portage devs are hurting gentoo by ignoring certain requests" still harkens right back to my point- if you believe it to be the case, nagging/bitching ain't going to improve it in anyway. People, you've got the source. You want it and think we're moving to slow/being tools/incompetent jackasses, whatever the belief, _you_ can do something about it that results in actual progress- I already stated the ways to help in my last email. So... again, you want it, help, or kindly sit back and wait for it to be implemented on our timeline. ~harring pgpcnzm3uK1lH.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: how to contribute to use/slot deps: was Re: [gentoo-dev] Multiple Repo Support
On 12/24/05, Curtis Napier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dan Meltzer wrote: > > On 12/24/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >>On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 23:56:37 -0800 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>wrote: > >>| It's really pretty simple- get off your butt and chip in if you want > >>| it, else you're on _our_ timeline (eg, we implement it when we deem > >>| it sane/ready to go). > >> > >>Is Portage development done to support the needs of those of us who > >>provide the tree, or is the tree expected to be restricted to whatever > >>Portage developers feel like implementing? > > > > > > I'd say the latter. > > > > The tree is restricted to what is implemented in portage, and as it is > > a volunteer organization, what is implemented is what the portage > > dev's feel like implementing. > > > > If you want more to be implemented, submit patches. > > > > hmmm, from reading the emails, bug reports and irc chats of portage > devs, non-portage devs and end users I would say it's a little bit of > both. The non-portage devs are using a tool provided by the portage devs > that allows them to create the Gentoo distro. Those two teams work > together to ensure the best possible tool. If the portage devs ONLY did > what they felt like (or the opposite, only did what the other devs told > them and ignored their own intimate knowledge of portage) then portage > would not be where it is today. True developement is a subtle play of > ideas back and forth between everyone involved resulting in an excellent > piece of software. > For the most part, yes. However, following these same lists, one notices ciaranm always taking potshots at the portage team, yet never contributing anything useful. So my previous response was directed primarily at him. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: how to contribute to use/slot deps: was Re: [gentoo-dev] Multiple Repo Support
Dan Meltzer wrote: On 12/24/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 23:56:37 -0800 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | It's really pretty simple- get off your butt and chip in if you want | it, else you're on _our_ timeline (eg, we implement it when we deem | it sane/ready to go). Is Portage development done to support the needs of those of us who provide the tree, or is the tree expected to be restricted to whatever Portage developers feel like implementing? I'd say the latter. The tree is restricted to what is implemented in portage, and as it is a volunteer organization, what is implemented is what the portage dev's feel like implementing. If you want more to be implemented, submit patches. hmmm, from reading the emails, bug reports and irc chats of portage devs, non-portage devs and end users I would say it's a little bit of both. The non-portage devs are using a tool provided by the portage devs that allows them to create the Gentoo distro. Those two teams work together to ensure the best possible tool. If the portage devs ONLY did what they felt like (or the opposite, only did what the other devs told them and ignored their own intimate knowledge of portage) then portage would not be where it is today. True developement is a subtle play of ideas back and forth between everyone involved resulting in an excellent piece of software. Yes, the portage devs have the final say since they are the ones doing the actual work but they would be remiss if they simply ignored everyone else and did what they wanted (although they could very well do this if they choose). Just as the non-portage devs would be remiss if we ignored everyone else while doing our work. The one doing the work is the one with the intimate knowledge of internals so their opinion should count very highly when it comes to implementing/not-implementing those ideas but not all of the ideas come from the portage-devs. Some of the ideas come from the non-portage-dev people who use it on a daily basis. As so many have said, Gentoo is an all volunteer project so you get what we have time to give you but we *do* listen to the ideas of others. We don't always implement those ideas but we do listen to them at the very least. You never know where the next great idea that will make things faster/more efficient is going to come from and we would be stupid to ignore them. confucius says: No dev is an island. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: how to contribute to use/slot deps: was Re: [gentoo-dev] Multiple Repo Support
On 12/24/05, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 23:56:37 -0800 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > | It's really pretty simple- get off your butt and chip in if you want > | it, else you're on _our_ timeline (eg, we implement it when we deem > | it sane/ready to go). > > Is Portage development done to support the needs of those of us who > provide the tree, or is the tree expected to be restricted to whatever > Portage developers feel like implementing? I'd say the latter. The tree is restricted to what is implemented in portage, and as it is a volunteer organization, what is implemented is what the portage dev's feel like implementing. If you want more to be implemented, submit patches. > > -- > Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (I can kill you with my brain) > Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org > Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm > > > > -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: how to contribute to use/slot deps: was Re: [gentoo-dev] Multiple Repo Support
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 23:56:37 -0800 Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | It's really pretty simple- get off your butt and chip in if you want | it, else you're on _our_ timeline (eg, we implement it when we deem | it sane/ready to go). Is Portage development done to support the needs of those of us who provide the tree, or is the tree expected to be restricted to whatever Portage developers feel like implementing? -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (I can kill you with my brain) Mail: ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm signature.asc Description: PGP signature
how to contribute to use/slot deps: was Re: [gentoo-dev] Multiple Repo Support
On Sat, Dec 24, 2005 at 12:40:35PM +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > On Saturday 24 December 2005 05:45, Spider (DmD Lj) wrote: > > On Sat, 2005-12-24 at 03:37 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote: > > > On Saturday 24 December 2005 03:23, Paul de Vrieze wrote: > > > > On Friday 23 December 2005 19:12, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 18:57:44 +0100 Paul de Vrieze <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > | Do those already work then? I'd like to be able to use them. > > > > > > > > > > Not in anything end users should be using. The syntax is pretty much > > > > > decided upon though... > > > > > > > > Glad that they are comming though. Even though I'd probably not hold my > > > > breath. > > > > > > Trolling? > > > > Erm.. No, I don't think he is. We've been asking / waiting for the > > [use] syntax to appear since before you joined the project. It's been on > > "the list" for so long that many of us have given up... ; ) > > Yep, bug 2272. (still was trolling). > > I don't think its trolling when we've been let down on it in the past, > > had it postponed to "the great redesign" ( project baghira, I think, > > too) And so on. > > "Even though I'd probably not hold my breath"? It's something that many > people > want but most are not evening willing to attempt implementing it. What was > the purpose of that comment? Expanding on this since jason's email is quite a bit nicer then my original response. Frankly... the potshot at portage is mild bullshit, but at this point I'm getting accustomed to it- bit easier to take a swipe at portage rather then to do actual work improving things (low blow potentially, but it sure as hell seems to be the case). If folks are looking to get this feature, here's how you scratch that itch. 1) design and implement your own stable based patch that is maintainable. 2) help complete the saviour branch which holds a massive refactoring (including use/slot required refactoring). Use/Slot is already sitting in that branch btw, although the resolver handling of it (ability to dig itself out of use cycles) isn't there yet. 3) help with the day to day bug mangling, regression fixes, and general maintenance. Or work on the small features that need to be dealt with; either way, help reduce the load so existing portage devs can implement the beast. Note that nowhere in that list, is nagging/snarky comments/general asshattery on public ml's listed as a means to get what you want. That's actually something of a negative contribution, since time is spent sending pissy emails such as this, or just results in people saying "screw portage work". Devs making noise, you know what the scenario is, you're on the receiving end of it too for your area of work. Portage is no different. It's really pretty simple- get off your butt and chip in if you want it, else you're on _our_ timeline (eg, we implement it when we deem it sane/ready to go). It's been 3 years for the bug- more then ample time to have contributed for some of the devs complaining in this thread. Chip in, or bite your tongue essentially. ~harring pgp8Y001vliBX.pgp Description: PGP signature
