Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> said: > On Tue, 5 May 2009 21:19:49 +0300 > > Markos Chandras <hwoar...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > We surely need more developers. Otherwise we ll end up maintaining > > 100<x<500 each one. Just look at the numbers ( total packages/total > > ACTIVE developers ). So first we need to attract more people. > > Evaluation and recruitment comes next > > I have a better way of improving those numbers: remove two thirds of > the packages from the main tree.
to me, the above two contradictory viewpoints are the essence of the apparent and real decline in Gentoo activity. The two are just not compatible with each other and there is no clear guidance on to which of the two should be followed. in the one corner we have the 'Daniel Robbins' corner, which stands for an open and inclusive process, which favors new comers, wants fast progress regardsless of the technical limitations of that process. also, being nice is more important than being correct. one central repository is where all development should happen - this is were we came from. in the other corner is the gentoo leftover of the exherbo fork: the few people how continue to work on Gentoo but generally prefer the direction of Exherbo. technical elitism, explicitism and formal standardization are their trade. being correct is more important than good intentions. overlays or multiple repositories help achieve a hierarchy of not-good-to- supported ebuilds. we are halfway here... it would be good if we collectively could agree on some of these issues, in order to move forward. as with many of the other technical discussions which lead to nowhere, it's more important that there is a clear direction, than into which direction we are headed. maybe we need a debian project leader position - or a council, which is sensitive to the internal devide among developers and gives clear directions. if the above offends you, please take a walk before replying. it may sound inflammtory - its not meant to be. thanks Thilo
