Re: [gentoo-dev] New Developer: Sanchan
Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: Yay - a fellow embedded developer - welcome :) Will you be joining the embedded team or the dev-embedded team? Thanks for the welcome! Probably I'll join dev-embedded, I was working on TinyOS related ebuilds when dragonheart mentored me. -- Sandro -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Developer: Sanchan
Mike Doty wrote: Please take a minute and welcome our newest developer, Sandro Bonazzola. Sanchan has joined to help with the embedded team. I'll let him introduce himself. Thanks Mike! -- Sandro -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Developer: Sanchan
Luca Barbato wrote: the Italian conspiracy taking place? who knows ^^ Welcome =) Thanks! Have a lot of fun and beware of the rabid developer =) Ok :-) -- Sandro -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Developer: Sanchan
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: Welcome Sandro :) Thanks Diego What scares me is the proportion of engineers... :P Why? -- Sandro -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] GLEP 42 (Critical news reporting) updates
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: Does anyone really use emerge --ask? Yes. -- Sandro -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Developer: Peter Volkov
Mike Doty wrote: Please take a moment to welcome our newest developer, pva. Peter is joining to help out with netmon. Welcome Peter! -- Sandro (Sanchan) - Gentoo Developer -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] RFC - new category dev-tos
Hi all, I'm working on TinyOS related ebuilds (Bug #78908) and since actually there are 20 ebuilds in my overlay may be worth proposing a dev-tos category. It will take a few weeks in order to have all the ebuilds updated for the new release of tinyos, have them reviewed by peer an committed to the tree, but it's a lot easier to make a category early rather than moving stuff. -- Sandro (Sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - new category dev-tos
Alexandre Buisse wrote: > I don't know TinyOS, but I assume it is a "toy OS", like minix and many > others. > What about a dev-toyos category? It could be great to have some other > toy OS, including the one I have been working on (funk, see > http://home.gna.org/funk/), but also, if licences allow it, plan9, > minix3, coyotos, l4 and so on. > > I do not have ebuilds for any of them but could help make some if people > agree that it could be useful. from: http://tinyos.net/special/mission TinyOS is an open-source operating system designed for wireless embedded sensor networks. It features a component-based architecture which enables rapid innovation and implementation while minimizing code size as required by the severe memory constraints inherent in sensor networks. TinyOS's component library includes network protocols, distributed services, sensor drivers, and data acquisition tools – all of which can be used as-is or be further refined for a custom application. TinyOS's event-driven execution model enables fine-grained power management yet allows the scheduling flexibility made necessary by the unpredictable nature of wireless communication and physical world interfaces. TinyOS has been ported to over a dozen platforms and numerous sensor boards. A wide community uses it in simulation to develop and test various algorithms and protocols. New releases see over 10,000 downloads. Over 500 research groups and companies are using TinyOS on the Berkeley/Crossbow Motes. Numerous groups are actively contributing code to the sourceforge site and working together to establish standard, interoperable network services built from a base of direct experience and honed through competitive analysis in an open environment. -- Sandro (Sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - new category dev-tos
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > Any reason for dev- rather than sys-? I believe we're going with > sys-fbsd... The only reason is that until yesterday TinyOS was targeted for dev-embedded. TinyOS is a small operating system for embedded sensors, it's very different from linux or fbsd. -- Sandro (Sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
RFC - new category dev-tinyos [was: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - new category dev-tos]
Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Saturday 14 January 2006 13:41, Donnie Berkholz wrote: >> Why stuck on "tos" -- Just spend the other 3 letters and make it tinyos >> at least, so people can figure out what it actually is. > > indeed, it'd still be smaller than dev-embedded :) > -mike Actually proposed name for the category: dev-tos: original proposed name dev-tinyos: better than dev-tos, and still shorter than dev-embedded ;-) dev-embedded: leave the 20 ebuilds in dev-embedded or try to fit them in other existing categories (maybe some packages can be moved to sys-tos or sys-tinyos: in order to go with sys-fbsd dev-toyos or dev-alternateos: in order to allow minix and co. to be placed here. Personally I prefer to keep TinyOS related ebuild in the same category. Having tossim and tinyviz (the emulator) in app-emulation, and all the sub library needed by tinyviz in dev-java may be confusing for tinyos users. But it can be done. TinyOS tarball includes lots of apps. Shipping them splitted in a lot of ebuilds may be proibitive without a dedicated category. But I can choose to ship them in a single ebuild, move the ebuilds into existing categories and get rid of dev-tinyos. -- Sandro (Sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New developers: Martin Ehmsen (ehmsen) and Michal Kurgan (moloh)
Tom Martin wrote: > Please help me welcome Martin and Michal to the rabble. :) Welcome! -- Sanchan -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC - new category dev-tos
R Hill wrote: > Considering we have _two_ separate categories for ~30 rox ebuilds, i think > dev-tinyos category is justifiable. Spreading out two dozen packages that > aren't useful for anything outside of TinyOS complicates things by making it > inconvenient for devs to maintain and users to find. And it is easier to add in rsync_exclude if you don't want it... But it seems that there is no much consensus for the new category. Tomorrow I've planned the final tests on tos-1.1.15 and nesc-1.2.1 that will be added to dev-embedded if today nobody else vote for dev-tinyos. -- Sandro (Sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC - new category dev-tos
The new category dev-tinyos is now in portage. If somebody is interested in having all the ebuilds related to TinyOS in portage, please feel free to follow bug# 78908 and its bloker bugs. Actually I'm focusing on bug #98662 and #101663, the ebuilds for these 2 bugs doesn't satisfy me, any idea on how to manage these 2 ebuilds is welcome. -- Sandro (Sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New developer: Patrick Mclean
Mike Doty wrote: > Please take a moment to welcome our newest developer, chutzpah. Patrick > joins us to help the sound and AMD64 herds. Welcome and good work! -- Sandro (Sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New developer: Jokey (Markus Ullmann)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Please welcome Markus to the team. Welcome to the team! :-) -- Sandro (Sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New developer: deltacow (Scott Stoddard)
Scott Stoddard wrote: > Thanks kloeri, blubb, metalgod, and everyone else I've talked to in the > past couple of days. I'll do my best to keep up the standards. (and by > jebus ciaranm, I'll use repoman!) "If everyone were like you, I'd be out of business!" (repoman) Welcome to the team! -- Sandro (Sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New developer: Alfredo Tupone (Tupone)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Alfredo writes about himself: > "I live in Rome, Italy. Well, I used to live there. Now I'm some > kilometers away. I own a club, not alone, that is about open source, > digital freedom mixed with entertainment. you can see that at > http://linux-club.org. Have to spend some time there, mostly on saturday > night :) The other days I work in a big firm, and sunday ... better > have some rest." Welcome to the Italian Conspiracy :-) -- Sandro Bonazzola (Sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New developer: Emanuele Giaquin (exg)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Welcome to the team Emanuele :) Welcome! __ Sandro Bonazzola (Sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Herds suck, fix them
> On Thursday 15 June 2006 00:31, Alec Warner wrote: > So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group > packages and maintaining developers? As Mike says: > they work just fine for me -- Sandro (sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New developer: Jurek Bartuszek (jurek)
Petteri Räty wrotes: It's my pleasure to introduce to you Jurek "jurek" Bartuszek. [cut] Welcome aboard! -- Sanchan -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Some sync control
Markus Ullmann wrote: > This was one of the big reasons. They (and we maybe as well) have people > there with 56k/64k dialup connections. Checking out the whole thing > would take ages. I can confirm we have people with 56k dial up :-) Checking out portage every day for a developer on 56k takes already a lot of time using cvs. If I had to check out the whole history every day I'd never become a gentoo developer. > And the last thing was the idea about distribution. There is one > "centrally" maintained tree and people commit to it all day. So the > chance of getting conflicts in pushes if one is on tour for three days > would be very likely and so the distributed part of the VCs wouldn't be > helpful. I agree. -- Sandro (sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ideas for projects...
Chris Gianelloni wrote: > Submit your ideas here, so we can discuss them. I will be choosing one > idea that we think we can accomplish to test out the idea of > Council-driven projects. A simple QA review of the entire portage tree, fixing any trivial QA concern like missing headers inclusion, missing -fno-strict-aliasing wherever there are bad programming practices and so on; pushing upstream whatever is just more complicate that including an header or adding a CFLAG. -- Sandro (sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Ideas for projects...
Ciaran McCreesh ha scritto: > And ultimately, it's a waste of QA's time. There are far more severe > breakages and there are not many people in QA. That's why I proposed this for a small targeted project. -- Sandro (sanchan) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
