Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
20.10.2013 18:31, hasufell пишет: Gamerlay is not related to the games team I am sorry, but it is games team not related to gamerlay. No offense, but gamerlay guys sometims just do their job. So, MAKE it related to Games team and fix stuff, considered broken. gamerlay which is a project that has failed. Please, do not throw such sentences without objective clarification, thanks. I have zero interest to work on gamerlay. So, this is your personal attitude to be against of gamerlay. We have got this, thanks. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
20.10.2013 19:22, hasufell пишет: I am not sure if you have read my list of arguments in the first post. Sunrise is based on that very concept. No user has direct commit access to the reviewed repository, for good reason (not sure what you mean with developer-only). So, what's the problem about adding such reviewed repo(more specifically - a branch) to gamerlay except your personal negative attitude to whole project itself? -- Best regards, Sergey Popov Gentoo developer Gentoo Desktop Effects project lead Gentoo Qt project lead Gentoo Proxy maintainers project lead signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
20.10.2013 20:12, hasufell пишет: This thread is derailed and I have no further interest in discussing here. And again, no offense, but it is not the first time when you are jumped, said, Everything in X is wrong! and then said I have lost interest. It is very mature position to propose enhancement and then - hides, do not you think? Sorry if i am saying harsh words, just talking how it looks like from side view. -- Best regards, Sergey Popov Gentoo developer Gentoo Desktop Effects project lead Gentoo Qt project lead Gentoo Proxy maintainers project lead signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 04:10:36 +0200 Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote: Tom Wijsman wrote: There is an alternative solution here; and that is to bring reviewed versions of them to the Portage tree or official games repository, and honor their contributions. That is a win-win situation for both of you. I'm afraid that's too naive. :\ Why? I'm afraid you have misread what I wrote; or, maybe we're not thinking on the same wave length about this. Gentoo Developers already do this work constantly; when they bring in new ebuilds from Bugzilla, review proxied maintainer's work, ... I have significant experience from contributors in several other projects who aren't interested in higher quality standards than their own. They will infallably find a way to continue their work as they see fit, with the case in point being gamerlay. I do not state that they are or should be interested. My alternative solution doesn't have to involve contributor interaction. Someone interested in maintaining higher standards will need to maintain such higher standards on their own, experience shows that zero percent of that effort is absorbed by those contributors who are content with lower standards - they more or less explicitly state that they do not want to learn how to attain higher quality. That's what I was suggesting: Use their work honoring them; but, do not give them back reviews or feedback as they don't want that. Unless one has actually been in this position I think it may be difficult to understand how extremely demotivating it is to keep cleaning up after people who do not want to learn. It is neither sustainable for a single person nor for a team. I feel the opposite, it is often easier to start from ebuilds that already work than to start from those that don't; as at that point you only need to apply testing and QA practices. Whereas otherwise you would need to reinvent the wheel, what others have already done before you. This is at least how others and I handle ebuilds and patches that are provided; but yes, I also see people that rather start from scratch. It's kind of a personal opinion thing, and I believe both approaches are a good way; the existence of one shouldn't exclude the other... If there's infrastructure to support it I'm strongly in favor of letting everyone do what they like to do, a sort of live and let live. There's always going to be so; eg. GitHub, but even with the existence of such infrastructure we actually won't need it, because the gamerlay project is backed by Gentoo Developers so I doubt there will be deprecation of it any time soon. Indeed, let it live. The question is why high quality would matter. It does for the Portage tree or official overlays that intend to deal with quite a large audience, it doesn't have to be so for gamerlay. -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
On 10/22/2013 09:54 AM, Sergey Popov wrote: 20.10.2013 20:12, hasufell пишет: This thread is derailed and I have no further interest in discussing here. And again, no offense, but it is not the first time when you are jumped, said, Everything in X is wrong! and then said I have lost interest. It is very mature position to propose enhancement and then - hides, do not you think? Sorry if i am saying harsh words, just talking how it looks like from side view. No need to escallate this further. People can form their own opinions on the subject. -- Regards, Markos Chandras
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
On 10/22/2013 09:48 AM, Sergey Popov wrote: 20.10.2013 18:31, hasufell пишет: Gamerlay is not related to the games team I am sorry, but it is games team not related to gamerlay. No offense, but gamerlay guys sometims just do their job. So, MAKE it related to Games team and fix stuff, considered broken. gamerlay which is a project that has failed. Please, do not throw such sentences without objective clarification, thanks. I have zero interest to work on gamerlay. So, this is your personal attitude to be against of gamerlay. We have got this, thanks. Again, lets stop here please. I think we proved that the Gentoo dev community as a whole is not hostile to user community overlays/projects. -- Regards, Markos Chandras
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
Markos, Markos Chandras wrote: This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If you intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing you are doing a great work. Everything in the Gentoo project is per definition strictly developer-only. I suppose that it's a function of having the project centered around a foundation. I understand that it is very easy to get tunnel vision once one is in, but please do remember that Gentoo is quite explicitly exclusionist. In some ways I think this is a really good thing. In other ways it's mind-numbingly restrictive. I do not pretend to have a solution to the problem that would make everyone happy. I don't think that such a solution can be found actually :) because different people require diametrically opposed things in order to be happy. Anyway, don't forget how the project works. Users can make themselves heard on mailing lists and in (most) IRC channels, but that is it. We are absolutely second-class citizens in the Gentoo community and transcending that class divide is anything but quick and easy. //Peter
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
Tom Wijsman wrote: There is an alternative solution here; and that is to bring reviewed versions of them to the Portage tree or official games repository, and honor their contributions. That is a win-win situation for both of you. I'm afraid that's too naive. :\ I have significant experience from contributors in several other projects who aren't interested in higher quality standards than their own. They will infallably find a way to continue their work as they see fit, with the case in point being gamerlay. Someone interested in maintaining higher standards will need to maintain such higher standards on their own, experience shows that zero percent of that effort is absorbed by those contributors who are content with lower standards - they more or less explicitly state that they do not want to learn how to attain higher quality. Unless one has actually been in this position I think it may be difficult to understand how extremely demotivating it is to keep cleaning up after people who do not want to learn. It is neither sustainable for a single person nor for a team. If there's infrastructure to support it I'm strongly in favor of letting everyone do what they like to do, a sort of live and let live. The question is why high quality would matter. If there is a use case then I think it may be quite worthwhile to have an official, high quality, games overlay being worked on. I wouldn't spend a second on it personally, but that's just because I don't play games. :) //Peter
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote: Markos, Markos Chandras wrote: This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If you intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing you are doing a great work. Everything in the Gentoo project is per definition strictly developer-only. I suppose that it's a function of having the project centered around a foundation. I can't think of any reason that the Foundation would have anything to do with who can and cannot participate in anything related to Gentoo. Gentoo projects have involved non-developers from time to time. The documentation project even gives commit access to non-developers, and arch testers have elevated privileges in bugzilla. The way our current portage tree is set up basically forces us into an all-or-nothing security model for commit access - we don't have layers of integration testing to protect users from errors or abuses. Proxy maintainership is one way around this. I think there are many here who would love to see more non-developer contribution. Suggestions are always welcome, and those willing to put in effort to make the suggestions happen are probably even more welcome. Moving to git certainly won't hurt, but that won't automatically change anything either. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
Rich Freeman wrote: This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If you intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing you are doing a great work. Everything in the Gentoo project is per definition strictly developer-only. I suppose that it's a function of having the project centered around a foundation. I can't think of any reason that the Foundation would have anything to do with who can and cannot participate in anything related to Gentoo. The reason I had in mind is indeed the all-or-nothing security model for the publications (ebuilds is what I had in mind, I should have written Everything I know in the Gentoo project..., sorry about that!) where even Copyright seems to have to be assigned to the foundation. Gentoo projects have involved non-developers from time to time. The documentation project even gives commit access to non-developers, Awesome! I'm really glad that I was wrong about that - but at the same time documentation tends to serve a bootstrapping function, and thus matter less over time. and arch testers have elevated privileges in bugzilla. I should have included bugzilla among mailing lists+IRC, users can indeed also have elevated privileges on IRC, but never equal to developers. It is radical exclusion and I'm reminded of it every time the #gentoo-dev channel mode catches my eye, painfully so if there's a discussion I could perhaps contribute to. Most of the time it is easy enough to say something privately to a relevant developer, but that's still very different from actual participation. The way our current portage tree is set up basically forces us into an all-or-nothing security model for commit access - we don't have layers of integration testing to protect users from errors or abuses. Proxy maintainership is one way around this. I considered mentioning it but I didn't because I think it's clear to everyone that it is indeed a workaround. I think there are many here who would love to see more non-developer contribution. Yes, I am absolutely sure that this is the case! But even though my blanket statement was incorrect, I guess the fact that I was wrong about this even after using Gentoo fairly actively for nearly 10 years means that it is not so clear to users if they can actually contribute in easy ways, and partially hostile documentation of course doesn't help. Suggestions are always welcome, and those willing to put in effort to make the suggestions happen are probably even more welcome. I for one consider the portage tree and the tools around it to be Gentoo's core value so I think writes to it becoming more accessible is the number one suggestion. Moving to git certainly won't hurt, but that won't automatically change anything either. I disagree there - it automatically changes what is effortlessly doable thanks to existence of helpful tooling and it also changes intuitive expectations as far as workflow goes. I do think that a world-writable Gerrit instance in front of a portage git tree will actually suffice to dramatically increase user participation - and of course bring significant developer review workload along with it! :) Everyone knows I'd like to see that happen, and I know that it is being worked on - I'm not in a hurry, but even so you're right that it still does not change the fact that only developers can submit commits from Gerrit into portage. As I already wrote I think there are both significant pros and cons to the developer-only approach, and because of how powerful and flexible Gentoo is there's no easy solution. As a case in point, TomWij made a mistake for an arch he rarely if ever uses. Gentoo is complex and also wonderful, and that means that contributing in the general case is not very easy. Simplifying the common case of x86/amd64 revbump (a world-writable Gerrit) will lead to more contribution, but what about the corner cases - it's impossible to know if I've actually tested my new ebuild on hppa if I just copypaste the old ebuild. I shouldn't need to communicate my testing out-of-band in a bugzilla or whatever and a thought I just had is that KEYWORDS may perhaps need higher temporal resolution than existing once per file.ebuild.. OTOH I don't think it's a good idea to require post-processing of the entire gentoo-x86 worktree to make it usable for portage. Tricky. //Peter
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
Dnia 2013-10-20, o godz. 14:09:29 hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org napisał(a): what does the games team think of an official games repository? $ layman -i games * games * ~ * Source : svn://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/games * Contact : ga...@gentoo.org * Type: Subversion; Priority: 50 * Quality : experimental * * Description: * A collection of work-in-progress ebuilds and ebuilds which require testing. * * Link: * http://games.gentoo.org/ * * Feed: * http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/games/timeline * -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/20/2013 02:15 PM, Michał Górny wrote: Dnia 2013-10-20, o godz. 14:09:29 hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org napisał(a): what does the games team think of an official games repository? $ layman -i games * games * ~ * Source : svn://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/games * Contact : ga...@gentoo.org * Type: Subversion; Priority: 50 * Quality : experimental * * Description: * A collection of work-in-progress ebuilds and ebuilds which require testing. * * Link: * http://games.gentoo.org/ * * Feed: * http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/games/timeline * Go ahead and clone it. Also, try to send a pull request. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSY8nGAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzLiYH/2cP4kZMrivFieirtiMh8obb 8LA/FfvJO+MTT6mQFiI6n8C59c5sxG7ljYPCyXzYvhFhEyZ1kf6UHW22its3PAnm OHZnE6v0AWwxpTEj1w/g/Zh/VgtrFVDXdummAUnVGxv+JOsRBFs/Xl+5+S1wst5E DjRJaZ8y8J7oXzG1/+4HiaB8nW5l77pX+kl1up5WfSyUdvQ+1YD1xEHEhjiRxyu0 OQXWW+Ra+UE/P46ZmkTdzaFECIAY+eAhPqeJnrDIBMw38AstxUjMk5g3XvqJWsPd ZPaCkVJ43ELh0jPRsKL9KOnCjSrDUyGUfSNLSUNk8d3e1Od3KGBXG5UB1j3QglY= =PaMb -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
Why not use gamerlay then? :D 20.10.2013, 19:17, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/20/2013 02:15 PM, Michał Górny wrote: Dnia 2013-10-20, o godz. 14:09:29 hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org napisał(a): what does the games team think of an official games repository? $ layman -i games * games * ~ * Source : svn://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/games * Contact : ga...@gentoo.org * Type : Subversion; Priority: 50 * Quality : experimental * * Description: * A collection of work-in-progress ebuilds and ebuilds which require testing. * * Link: * http://games.gentoo.org/ * * Feed: * http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/games/timeline * Go ahead and clone it. Also, try to send a pull request. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSY8nGAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzLiYH/2cP4kZMrivFieirtiMh8obb 8LA/FfvJO+MTT6mQFiI6n8C59c5sxG7ljYPCyXzYvhFhEyZ1kf6UHW22its3PAnm OHZnE6v0AWwxpTEj1w/g/Zh/VgtrFVDXdummAUnVGxv+JOsRBFs/Xl+5+S1wst5E DjRJaZ8y8J7oXzG1/+4HiaB8nW5l77pX+kl1up5WfSyUdvQ+1YD1xEHEhjiRxyu0 OQXWW+Ra+UE/P46ZmkTdzaFECIAY+eAhPqeJnrDIBMw38AstxUjMk5g3XvqJWsPd ZPaCkVJ43ELh0jPRsKL9KOnCjSrDUyGUfSNLSUNk8d3e1Od3KGBXG5UB1j3QglY= =PaMb -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/20/2013 02:19 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote: Why not use gamerlay then? :D * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there * low quality -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSY8sQAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzMRQH/RG20ePKLfL3aa3BYhJQgZUb BCo3X80nyEsOR9AbiSdNvX3jXD+eRBGqcxcafl4DVueLT24quTvzFsCQZbLpZ8CF sUzRVIZTFBewdCTcxb0GPFrnCPBeI0zyhY/ia7PrdQSK40t6HwLSnk106+yskJx8 ofpvPo55GStwrDRkiMDhodDrYKS2ZUhHNh2a3xzJ1RTVued6z8lmPBesXJ1lYcs0 8SRDzYmb75Cate5BgknCWKswqc0SfZaDPSfqjoGIU9speS8QW/sHObHXD32WXvyo XVwN/aFY5B6Poeao/0uUr7EXxshz81wosz0QMmsdM02rJqGGrfZby3dZ9mPM/QI= =SRYL -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
* not related to the games team * no review whatsoever from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to back to work on it together with community. * low quality low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low quality of something else? Anyway, it is fixable too. Just let's start work on it.
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote: * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to back to work on it together with community. * low quality low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low quality of something else? Anyway, it is fixable too. Just let's start work on it. I agree. It's better to work with the user community and join efforts than having yet-another-shiny overlay. -- Regards, Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
On 21 October 2013 01:09, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: what does the games team think of an official games repository? These are some arguments for such a repo: * sunrise does not allow ebuilds when any version is already in the tree (so no live or beta ebuilds for existing in-tree-games), so that is not always a real alternative * easier contribution and reviews * let people contribute proprietary games ebuilds here which cannot be added to the tree, because no dev owns the game * let people contribute alpha/beta/live/experimental ebuilds here * deprecate repositories like gamerlay which do not undergo any kind of review and have low quality * some of the work here can directly flow into the tree * less decentralization of games ebuilds when there is a central overlay for contribution and testing * a lot of other herds already practice this workflow with success Yes, overlays suck. But bugzilla as a review platform sucks more and IRC is also not the first place people look for. I feel most these concerns can be solved by simply migrating the existing SVN based games overlay to git. Branches are much less troublesome under git, and ebuilds can be segregated into branches by relative quality, with mandatory review to escalate the branch an ebuild is in. IME, gitifying things greatly reduces barriers to contribution, and the games svn repo doesn't have the same burdens to migration that gx86 does. So given that, why not just propose a git migration, and then we can work on improving the workflow afterwards. -- Kent
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/20/2013 04:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote: * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to back to work on it together with community. * low quality low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low quality of something else? Anyway, it is fixable too. Just let's start work on it. I agree. It's better to work with the user community and join efforts than having yet-another-shiny overlay. Gamerlay is not related to the games team and this thread is not about gamerlay which is a project that has failed. I have zero interest to work on gamerlay. It would have to start with removing direct commit access of users. This is a question directed to the games team to revive their overlay and improve workflow (e.g. I have some games ebuilds myself which are still very experimental/alpha in my personal overlay... I'd migrate them there). -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSY+lTAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWz08EIAI0nJi+ztLakQF81MItn2E/y e3ZOcutk5YNrRrByxpduecvtiR2tx2pNc5v5GvFzVFzyJP+d5ZbbORhaz91ZbRoS y8fCCvt+XjdQ0Q1w/2PnvJklMEzozozz9JbqN5XrDeNhsQEIRXM210gNxQBFAoBw EBY/+gOuAjtuXo1c2CwM2b6jCg1mnShcqMqgedaUdNcRc8l7t63UuTsYF6/bMRxU Tw/uhscSo27SGXD5xDP1cbE7Ikauu0NxCrNxYQOgRyZBgBFbtiVsBWv43Tgaqb4r Ta9q46ALQtdq9ppa+MZH0Ad0bg7x0nXeC1CjtN1chhXGb0zrNxy2edYlYjPio+g= =2qId -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
On 10/20/2013 03:31 PM, hasufell wrote: On 10/20/2013 04:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote: * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to back to work on it together with community. * low quality low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low quality of something else? Anyway, it is fixable too. Just let's start work on it. I agree. It's better to work with the user community and join efforts than having yet-another-shiny overlay. Gamerlay is not related to the games team and this thread is not about gamerlay which is a project that has failed. I have zero interest to work on gamerlay. It would have to start with removing direct commit access of users. This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If you intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing you are doing a great work. This is a question directed to the games team to revive their overlay and improve workflow (e.g. I have some games ebuilds myself which are still very experimental/alpha in my personal overlay... I'd migrate them there). Then you shouldn't have CC'd the gentoo-dev if you are not interested in oppinion of the community -- Regards, Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 8:09 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: what does the games team think of an official games repository? ... Yes, overlays suck. But bugzilla as a review platform sucks more and IRC is also not the first place people look for. I think having an overlay which is reviewed for quality is a good idea. What would the workflow (for both reviewers and contributors) look like?
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/20/2013 04:40 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: On 10/20/2013 03:31 PM, hasufell wrote: On 10/20/2013 04:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote: * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to back to work on it together with community. * low quality low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low quality of something else? Anyway, it is fixable too. Just let's start work on it. I agree. It's better to work with the user community and join efforts than having yet-another-shiny overlay. Gamerlay is not related to the games team and this thread is not about gamerlay which is a project that has failed. I have zero interest to work on gamerlay. It would have to start with removing direct commit access of users. This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If you intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing you are doing a great work. I am not sure if you have read my list of arguments in the first post. Sunrise is based on that very concept. No user has direct commit access to the reviewed repository, for good reason (not sure what you mean with developer-only). -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSY/UpAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWznLUH/iwVCHBl//wXhSTGzAiOPq/P UGwjOoFKBuS4BeElSjTc3QbBWGITy7Wy0kzoa6R8rJAA+eU0AMa/w/QvCDIgGybR SmYrUgdE0MqPVQHDhlbs8TFE8JGZ6TRM5M3z2GJUapucOsyIuiSOY9rYsiIreD19 fuwqdmrH3sGnd/WEZJSgBQYkVfWw9hQgBnRwf7HSVMiy0+0RD4QZ1vHcPHm4KjYw bfRWDuVtIq37hryAIBe9vcGqEZe/lWeyeaUBPFV+0CpXCt54VoJHVI6UVYFFlsZP wubM5zBtEaHs6vE+bGtMcjTf5ljhddbLZMq/ZsMTqYuUC87cKnUKm3Co2k3lnTk= =JOYj -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/20/2013 05:00 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 8:09 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: what does the games team think of an official games repository? ... Yes, overlays suck. But bugzilla as a review platform sucks more and IRC is also not the first place people look for. I think having an overlay which is reviewed for quality is a good idea. What would the workflow (for both reviewers and contributors) look like? I personally would propose the standard github way. The only thing that still bothers me about that is that there is no automatic way of doing a repoman full check, like the travis hooks on github. A lot of people get trivial things wrong and automizing a reject with links to devmanual/wiki etc. on how to get it right would make things easier. An alternative would probably be gerrit which vapier seems to be a fan of. But we don't even have an ebuild. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSY/UwAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzm/MIAJTmPJqUMN4Do4McRNhDxH6X L4Q90caIHnvhVkuQ4UCbbCqAVEHo4CJOiHuaFtb59D64yuaWcFBEDdDrfz44nHLj ysaDwqUeTkHTkIq9bHibp+4s6fA7Qk0OEjZ+M1FuNDc/KOC86k0ka/IKs+l34+gH +tsVkPWvdBllb60u38EZakwuTBIgLQX4bK8MO80YTo0EmgmpWVBZUFfcWrbzx2Zb aZyxNy4KT3GjOLxPdejRu1+e0fkT9JcV6AEmvJj9ZHV9Hxrnssn0FsoTny3Ah2tj LY9sVTxzJThCTtLUK6oRJMupX4V1YIpZmGqlBpTk/xypE7wFUacVP00vADx/6CU= =Lg8u -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
On 10/20/2013 04:22 PM, hasufell wrote: On 10/20/2013 04:40 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: On 10/20/2013 03:31 PM, hasufell wrote: On 10/20/2013 04:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote: * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to back to work on it together with community. * low quality low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low quality of something else? Anyway, it is fixable too. Just let's start work on it. I agree. It's better to work with the user community and join efforts than having yet-another-shiny overlay. Gamerlay is not related to the games team and this thread is not about gamerlay which is a project that has failed. I have zero interest to work on gamerlay. It would have to start with removing direct commit access of users. This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If you intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing you are doing a great work. I am not sure if you have read my list of arguments in the first post. Sunrise is based on that very concept. No user has direct commit access to the reviewed repository, for good reason (not sure what you mean with developer-only). I was mainly referring to your way to exluding this community which is already working on the gaming side of Gentoo. You shouldn't ignore active contributors because their ebuilds happen to be of lower quality. It would be nice if you could try to actually talk to them and find a way to make them contribute to your new overlay otherwise you may end up actually be the only maintainer of it. -- Regards, Markos Chandras
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/20/2013 05:26 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: On 10/20/2013 04:22 PM, hasufell wrote: On 10/20/2013 04:40 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: On 10/20/2013 03:31 PM, hasufell wrote: On 10/20/2013 04:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote: * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to back to work on it together with community. * low quality low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low quality of something else? Anyway, it is fixable too. Just let's start work on it. I agree. It's better to work with the user community and join efforts than having yet-another-shiny overlay. Gamerlay is not related to the games team and this thread is not about gamerlay which is a project that has failed. I have zero interest to work on gamerlay. It would have to start with removing direct commit access of users. This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If you intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing you are doing a great work. I am not sure if you have read my list of arguments in the first post. Sunrise is based on that very concept. No user has direct commit access to the reviewed repository, for good reason (not sure what you mean with developer-only). I was mainly referring to your way to exluding this community which is already working on the gaming side of Gentoo. You shouldn't ignore active contributors because their ebuilds happen to be of lower quality. Thanks for your opinion on this. It's nice to see that my efforts of (unrequested) reviews on bugzilla, overlays, forums and sunrise makes you say that I ignore contributors. Especially those contributors who respond to or even request reviews (many don't even respond to unrequested reviews). Some people from gamerlay have made clear that they are not really interested in reviews, yet you want me to waste time on that? I don't think this discussion leads anywhere. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSY/l+AAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzulQIAKa4qBEE62Zxta3Lv2dB5sHr JoBJiOQbX0S2SfmeZSUg4OCkyKzSRyxIXhS+3X86AwkYR/TWcc7a4pwaQvYlUIjz YA2HRFY00AWVjNzgYRmwYaggRsJ6TI8iIsNXnWEYkB+TVHrlewwwJn+hNF4ELD25 fNsHTxduY8yFiPTgYSKvp84xAC0SVGds4xc5WOITuYngRp5sdq0SELr5JSOjw6tR qbrQ79eG4vB+j2ye0zG1BoXtKP2uaP0cSIjPL6OvzXCX4+l27czrp6akHYihFsZz +i2JfGN5XGpEi3l6AFVD8VZi0/oUwSR/d6bKoo+crLBhS+29MzFfYuS/Ob7hrfg= =3rmu -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 11:40 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: On 10/20/2013 05:26 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: On 10/20/2013 04:22 PM, hasufell wrote: On 10/20/2013 04:40 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: On 10/20/2013 03:31 PM, hasufell wrote: On 10/20/2013 04:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote: * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to back to work on it together with community. * low quality low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low quality of something else? Anyway, it is fixable too. Just let's start work on it. I agree. It's better to work with the user community and join efforts than having yet-another-shiny overlay. Gamerlay is not related to the games team and this thread is not about gamerlay which is a project that has failed. I have zero interest to work on gamerlay. It would have to start with removing direct commit access of users. This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If you intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing you are doing a great work. I am not sure if you have read my list of arguments in the first post. Sunrise is based on that very concept. No user has direct commit access to the reviewed repository, for good reason (not sure what you mean with developer-only). I was mainly referring to your way to exluding this community which is already working on the gaming side of Gentoo. You shouldn't ignore active contributors because their ebuilds happen to be of lower quality. Thanks for your opinion on this. It's nice to see that my efforts of (unrequested) reviews on bugzilla, overlays, forums and sunrise makes you say that I ignore contributors. Especially those contributors who respond to or even request reviews (many don't even respond to unrequested reviews). Some people from gamerlay have made clear that they are not really interested in reviews, yet you want me to waste time on that? I don't think this discussion leads anywhere. He's just warning you not to ignore the existing community in your attempt to create a new community project. It is good advice; take it that way instead of responding to it as negative criticism. I think it might be a tough sell to get existing gamerlay contributors to switch to this new official contribution process. If you started working within that community, you may have better luck persuading people to get on board. If you have no interest in doing that, just be aware that you are excluding a significant base of contributors.
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
On 10/20/2013 04:40 PM, hasufell wrote: Some people from gamerlay have made clear that they are not really interested in reviews, yet you want me to waste time on that? A guy asked you why you don't work in the gamerlay. All you said was that gamerlay was a failed attemp and that you have zero interest in working in it. No futher explanations. And now, finally, after 4 e-mails you decided to tell us that you have actually talked to them and they are not interested in ebuild reviewing. Ok then... I don't think this discussion leads anywhere. I am not sure why you even open that thread. Your e-mail basically requests the games@ team opinion. Again, if you didn't want others to comment on this, you shouldn't have CC'd gentoo-dev. -- Regards, Markos Chandras
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
On 10/20/2013 05:04 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote: On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 11:40 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: On 10/20/2013 05:26 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: On 10/20/2013 04:22 PM, hasufell wrote: On 10/20/2013 04:40 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: On 10/20/2013 03:31 PM, hasufell wrote: On 10/20/2013 04:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote: * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to back to work on it together with community. * low quality low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low quality of something else? Anyway, it is fixable too. Just let's start work on it. I agree. It's better to work with the user community and join efforts than having yet-another-shiny overlay. Gamerlay is not related to the games team and this thread is not about gamerlay which is a project that has failed. I have zero interest to work on gamerlay. It would have to start with removing direct commit access of users. This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If you intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing you are doing a great work. I am not sure if you have read my list of arguments in the first post. Sunrise is based on that very concept. No user has direct commit access to the reviewed repository, for good reason (not sure what you mean with developer-only). I was mainly referring to your way to exluding this community which is already working on the gaming side of Gentoo. You shouldn't ignore active contributors because their ebuilds happen to be of lower quality. Thanks for your opinion on this. It's nice to see that my efforts of (unrequested) reviews on bugzilla, overlays, forums and sunrise makes you say that I ignore contributors. Especially those contributors who respond to or even request reviews (many don't even respond to unrequested reviews). Some people from gamerlay have made clear that they are not really interested in reviews, yet you want me to waste time on that? I don't think this discussion leads anywhere. He's just warning you not to ignore the existing community in your attempt to create a new community project. It is good advice; take it that way instead of responding to it as negative criticism. I think it might be a tough sell to get existing gamerlay contributors to switch to this new official contribution process. If you started working within that community, you may have better luck persuading people to get on board. If you have no interest in doing that, just be aware that you are excluding a significant base of contributors. Thanks for explaining what I was trying to say :) Seems like there are people who understand what I am saying and I am not talking nonsense :) -- Regards, Markos Chandras
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
Some people from gamerlay have made clear that they are not really interested in reviews, yet you want me to waste time on that? I bet, you misunderstand that position. It is a big difference between «users is not interested in review» and «users is not interested to follow the way like «some gentoo developers» maintain their projects. Actually, I told many times already: let's discuss the suggestions to change the policy to work on gamerlay. Make suggestions. Make discussions. I personally too very like github-like model. I personally very like an idea to review idea to review commits. But let's don't forget, that we're community. Let's use Do-cracy. But on the other hand I don't even have time to finish ebuild quiz, no mention to change gamerlay behaviour in single person right now. Also, back to that conversation: Despite I like an idea of reviewing commits to gamerlay, I disagree with that you proposition that all stuff should go to the sunrise. And also, as I already mentioned, I keep all the staff (including games) that I don't want to be reviewed in my own overlay (btw, despite of that, sometimes I find my ebuilds commited to the tree with little changes). And I even position it (my overlay) like the sandbox, not the workplace. And I also suggested to make gamerlay to be a community-sandbox for games, where developers can get game ebuilds to commit them to the tree (maybe, after some refinement). And that way worked some time. But then I noticed that you have become negative about gamerlay as the essence. So, once again: sugesst! discuss! let's do! P.S. Also, actually, that conversation (which, I guess, makes you talking about refusing reviews by gamerlay people) was under the impression of maintenance of some other (non-game-related) part, so, may be you took on your accoun some arguments not directed to you, but for some unnamed somebody.
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 This thread is derailed and I have no further interest in discussing here. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSZAD3AAoJEFpvPKfnPDWztwMIAKT0q2I/UOfBip5RCpTpdOdu d6y38qIKbbEZPBjpe1tH3s5nqavOnYDcRlE00brUZXI4x2qa58acbdU9xeWNJFts qXKAZHl6txAE+upqewE1MrZXm6qf7toUHVAs2i4pw9rKdb9c5rWdUNk2MiPNKzr5 9FmsfcBL+8y3psnrV3aZNrjuJRSkY01Q87PHcNxvPE+EbqNbBMGFP1VRTnyCCF8X 9J4Rh9beFKZnERnVBPhfz6jaw9YKis+TlJQtuqXopUQQgNHvkC0LgvzxynyFyXEj I5XT4I/M0frPeUpATHfdMJF+GO9h9GVc0kQrFwWaZC9bIPF1/i2k+EyGwHq6+oY= =q2JZ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
Am Sonntag, 20. Oktober 2013, 18:12:39 schrieb hasufell: This thread is derailed and I have no further interest in discussing here. Well maybe others do now? http://cdn.meme.li/i/p77qn.jpg -- Andreas K. Huettel Gentoo Linux developer dilfri...@gentoo.org http://www.akhuettel.de/
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 10/20/2013 06:52 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: Am Sonntag, 20. Oktober 2013, 18:12:39 schrieb hasufell: This thread is derailed and I have no further interest in discussing here. Well maybe others do now? http://cdn.meme.li/i/p77qn.jpg https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council/Code_of_conduct -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSZA9nAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzgogH/A3U90r/VKHFNjoUZhpe9P7z V5PP4e9jYjJ4YF6Z1SJJ9Pfawqp9h3RV8FU+RlMhDgqTKAsqXe1IDKtGPntGU9uD TqIZeQh7XRdTNgztv4wV9Rnfcp94rgWitb2s4u+DcV31XR8xuYc6OtJUErJ4mey8 DeNsLSbZYbAsi100/yi+yhCtZXEnzgRbwdMEo/AgedzXrF1xJwMVqndkXNpCtub8 xlE87zMFm2rUxJhrKWK7ddPE8lHf8WCn8OXBmzPUai6axa1hoscHnHOpbH2K+sVf LjJ+TRDD9DilxbNJBkUaCSI7YLpjjZ1xTypP7w9DNi5vHWK8Z2RbfFnJ1CXt2eI= =YZjL -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 20 Oct 2013 18:12:39 +0200 hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: This thread is derailed ... The argument deprecate repositories like gamerlay which do not undergo any kind of review and have low quality you gave causes a sub thread that tests the reality of that argument, that is to be expected. It however is in no way derailing the thread; because you effectively propose to deprecate it as well as highlight certain aspects to it, if you drop your position we can all agree and no further discuss it. Since this is a repository with 41 contributors of which 6 Gentoo Developers, there are definitely people whom have spend a lot of work there [1] and there are users whom use this work on a daily or weekly. If these people want to commit and not uphold high quality standards; just let them do that, there is no need for review in that repository. There is an alternative solution here; and that is to bring reviewed versions of them to the Portage tree or official games repository, and honor their contributions. That is a win-win situation for both of you. Don't fight overlays, but use them in the community's favor. [1]: Top 10 contributors and count of commits. 169 Author: Azamat H. Hackimov azamat.hacki...@gmail.com 150 Author: Marcel Unbehaun frostwo...@gmx.de 123 Author: Christian Schmitt ch...@ilovelinux.de 99 Author: Marcel Unbehaun mar...@frostworx.de 85 Author: Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov m...@mva.name 80 Author: Locke Shinseiko wizzl...@gmail.com 45 Author: Nikoli nik...@lavabit.com 32 Author: krytzz kry...@soylent.eu 29 Author: Mario Kicherer d...@kicherer.org 20 Author: Romain Perier mrpo...@gentoo.org Please consider that some of these people contribute in other places, want to become Gentoo Developers or actually do want to receive review. - -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSZFh1AAoJEJWyH81tNOV9vA8IALifLD5jZD0LPmlrgfn/omAW oxFM3B76oTcX7ALfwEZiq/vRyUmFC3aYZcf76CEJDd4ZYFm2ZCthPoeMHHHjtBwS Sr/E1+ZvpvPr8VNIhu8XEAuE/dm/+t5DpezKa2nYF8LVG41+N7RRPGzlJ/d4/LGF TXbCE4c8+ZTREFYLJdDIPp0kiyi7xNWM6KmVBJL678FWc4x6zAAEcmSk2OjUoz7h HVLnrP1pDlVE04XcSHqCfM8WAUzJ7p6a7sQipnuiNZF7Hoxa8k6MSrEidjamt8ET H1goNipOvBC96pG/A3/MP4lAtR01n36i2jYoVQLZKhvKssVMCORFeLcS5Uv1jbI= =I7ia -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Sun, 20 Oct 2013 17:22:24 +0200 hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote: I personally would propose the standard github way. The only thing that still bothers me about that is that there is no automatic way of doing a repoman full check, like the travis hooks on github. If you want this to happen; I have previously wrote something which posts issues, pull requests and commits to an IRC channel, this uses the GitHub API and can be adapted into running `git ... ; repoman full` upon a pull request being made. The only thing left to do is posting the result back; I'm not sure if commenting on GitHub can be automated, but if we can't do that then a webpage which gives an overview of it is an alternative solution. A lot of people get trivial things wrong and automizing a reject with links to devmanual/wiki etc. on how to get it right would make things easier. +1 Should we bring this to repoman under the form of a --learn parameter? An alternative would probably be gerrit which vapier seems to be a fan of. But we don't even have an ebuild. Since I have just noticed this is Java, CC-ed us on the bug and this is on my list; but given its size, I can't make any promises as to when we will have the whole ebuild set made. I hope for it to be maintainable... - -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSZFyUAAoJEJWyH81tNOV9LbYH/AndndFvFj34C2fuGebmBA/1 GBnRdlCUcXZD5nsfxYb5YRLWi3sRV5bXSTWirbqLyNF+sG13JpJ2/I4UJ3k+TKzQ L7ASDo+HmvigbU88PW3imucoj5FkPT3ZpklNYafLVU79BAzU9TSiCVBlrLAa+YM7 fB2GXG0evBOKm38QEDcBa0HJZbeppU0QOs48i6mke16nt5mPZpXamMFxnkTjpMZS W4U0VBeZmqOp//rIIS8TdHXm5+96LxUOEd7Rm9cS6124PxywfN9nX/iYNK7LpX02 mkcH5ie/w+s4njLbb5vf222E9MxjrLeqBjj6aEbd7ke7ZZIilxSxuZQ0zHRMmI4= =XRY4 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
