On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 15:09:06 +0200
Natanael Copa <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What you didn't need to be a gentoo dev to be a package maintainer?
> Lets say anyone could be marked as maintainer in an ebuild. When
> there is a bug, the package maintainer fixes the bug and submits an
> updated ebuil
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
simp
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 ju
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 accor
On 10/7/06, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
If anyone had still any doubt about this, he can easily try to tweak a
release :P
I've been doing releng-like work lately to build Gentoo/FreeBSD stages with
catalyst and I have to say that releng is doing a heck of an hard job to
p
On Saturday 07 October 2006 01:26, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> 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.
If anyone had still any doubt about this, he ca
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,
On 2006.10.04 15:27, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
[snip]
I'll give you Release Engineering's "status reports" for September,
October, and November:
September: taking a well-deserved break
October: taking a well-deserved break
November: taking a well-deserved break
How about other projects that re
On 2006.10.04 13:15, Brandon Low wrote:
As usual, sweeping new policies or procedures WILL NOT FIX THINGS.
[snip]
--Brandon
Since I have been a Gentoo user, there have been two completely
different management styles in use. When drobbins was around, he was
like the MD and Gentoo was man
On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 08:34 +0200, Natanael Copa wrote:
> If the "proxy maintainer" is specified as contact person in the ebuild,
> and will be added to the CC list on bugs posted, the official developer
> will not need to care about it until he gets a response from the proxy
> developer.
Well, lo
On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 09:52 +0300, Alin Nastac wrote:
> Natanael Copa wrote:
> > Nobody has ever showed interest and I'm not pushing my services on
> > anyone.
> >
> Why exactly you don't want to become a Gentoo dev? The whole "proxy
> maintainer" thing is a bunch of crap. The Gentoo developer w
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 22:00 -0400, Mike Kelly wrote:
> > I don't *want* to drown projects in bureaucracy and paperwork. I want
> > them to *accomplish* things, instead.
>
> Sending a brief "All's well with releng" email isn't exactly what I
> would call "drowning in bureaucracy".
Of course not,
On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 12:48 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 12:52:14 +0200 "Kevin F. Quinn"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | Minority arches don't affect devs who aren't interested in them
>
> Actually, they do. Minority archs lead to much better tree QA being
> done, more bugs
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Thursday 05 October 2006 14:04, Luca Barbato wrote:
>> Not today, not today, 1/2 of the devils are on a strike because of the
>> recent freezes in the latest months, the others are still recovering
>> from the flu caused by the change in the climate...
> What i
On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 09:52 +0300, Alin Nastac wrote:
> Natanael Copa wrote:
> > Nobody has ever showed interest and I'm not pushing my services on
> > anyone.
> >
> Why exactly you don't want to become a Gentoo dev? The whole "proxy
> maintainer" thing is a bunch of crap. The Gentoo developer w
On Thursday 05 October 2006 14:04, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Not today, not today, 1/2 of the devils are on a strike because of the
> recent freezes in the latest months, the others are still recovering
> from the flu caused by the change in the climate...
What if I call as a reinforcement the BSD daem
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Thursday 05 October 2006 13:48, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> Actually, they do. Minority archs lead to much better tree QA being
>> done, more bugs in packages being identified and more ebuild and
>> package bugs being fixed.
> Hell is gonna break loose, I agree w
On Thursday 05 October 2006 13:48, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Actually, they do. Minority archs lead to much better tree QA being
> done, more bugs in packages being identified and more ebuild and
> package bugs being fixed.
Hell is gonna break loose, I agree with Ciaran!
--
Diego "Flameeyes" Pette
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 12:52:14 +0200 "Kevin F. Quinn"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Minority arches don't affect devs who aren't interested in them
Actually, they do. Minority archs lead to much better tree QA being
done, more bugs in packages being identified and more ebuild and
package bugs being fi
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 11:39:07 -0400
"Thomas Cort" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/4/06, Kevin F. Quinn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 09:21:08 -0400
> > "Thomas Cort" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > > The "minority" arches like mips, sparc etc seem to get along
> > > > qu
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 11:44:07 -0400
"Thomas Cort" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/4/06, Kevin F. Quinn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 09:41:45 -0400
> > Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > My view is that while they're being actively supported, there's no
> > reason
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 11:44:07 -0400
"Thomas Cort" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/4/06, Kevin F. Quinn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 09:41:45 -0400
> > Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > My view is that while they're being actively supported, there's no
> > reason
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
- Project status reports once a month for every project
Totally agree on this one!
OK.
I'll give you Release Engineering's "status reports" for September,
October, and November:
September: taking a well-deserved break
October: taking a well-deserved break
November: ta
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 13:20 -0400, Caleb Tennis wrote:
With the increase in developer and project overlays, I see the
possibility for reducing work needed to maintain many packages. As
Natanael Copa, it would be nice for him to be able to maintain packages
without having
Natanael Copa wrote:
> Nobody has ever showed interest and I'm not pushing my services on
> anyone.
>
Why exactly you don't want to become a Gentoo dev? The whole "proxy
maintainer" thing is a bunch of crap. The Gentoo developer will still be
expected to be responsible of his/her commits, which
On Thu, 2006-10-05 at 00:00 +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 17:13 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
>
> > With the increase in developer and project overlays, I see the
> > possibility for reducing work needed to maintain many packages. As
> > Natanael Copa, it would be nice for
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 10:27:17 -0400
Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > - Project status reports once a month for every project
> >
> > Totally agree on this one!
>
> OK.
>
> I'll give you Release Engineering's "status reports" for September,
> October, and November:
>
> September
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 17:43 -0400, Mike Pagano wrote:
> How about something in the "planet" format that where each group
> reporting status could do so at their schedule when they feel an
> update is necessary or warrented.
>
> Then users could just read the website for the latest status updates.
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 09:46:31 -0400
Mike Frysinger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> too bad sparc is tied to old kernels and ppc64 toolchain is useless
Depends on your sparc64 box. Most of them are fairly stable now. Its
just the SBUS boxes and some of the pricier hardware that may be
problematic.
C
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 17:13 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> With the increase in developer and project overlays, I see the
> possibility for reducing work needed to maintain many packages. As
> Natanael Copa, it would be nice for him to be able to maintain packages
> without having CVS access.
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 10:36:37AM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 07:15 -0500, Brandon Low wrote:
> > What if the problem is too many devs instead of too few? Slackware
> > Linux is a comparatively simple to maintain distribution, but ONE person
> > does it. How many devs
On 10/4/06, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Work is done in the overlays, tested, improved, then committed
into the main tree once the kinks have been worked out. We get a
stronger core tree with fewer "developers" and a better interaction with
the community.
And a Gentoo that's so
On 10/4/06, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 12:21 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> >> Now, perhaps what everyone would like, instead, would be status reports
> >> *where necessary* from certain projects?
> >>
>
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 12:21 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> >> Now, perhaps what everyone would like, instead, would be status reports
> >> *where necessary* from certain projects?
> >>
> >> In fact, the council has been discussing asking a few p
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 13:20 -0400, Caleb Tennis wrote:
> > Basically, the person doing one or two commits a month *do not* need CVS
> > access. They can still *contribute* at their current pace without
> > having CVS access and a nice @gentoo.org email address.
>
> Sorry, but as a dev who has lur
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Chris Gianelloni wrote:
>> Now, perhaps what everyone would like, instead, would be status reports
>> *where necessary* from certain projects?
>>
>> In fact, the council has been discussing asking a few projects about the
>> status on some of their tasks. The main reason f
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 07:15:16AM -0500, Brandon Low wrote:
> As usual, sweeping new policies or procedures WILL NOT FIX THINGS.
I fully agree to this.
While some of the ideas may be good, and some not, each of them should
be discussed seperately and eventually something good will come out of
it.
On Wed, Oct 04, 2006 at 10:27:17AM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Here's the games team's "status reports" for every month:
>
> "Fixed more bugs, added more packages, cleaned up some ebuilds."
You forgot to mention the weekly team meeting including a motivational
speech. Shame on you!
Apart fr
Thomas Cort wrote:
> I mainly wrote "No competing projects" because there aren't any rules
> preventing competing projects. Since top level projects don't need
> discussion or formal approval from anyone, any dev could make their
> own Gentoo/x86 project. I think that's crazy.
Sure, you could in t
Thomas Cort wrote:
>> Unnecessary: again, be more specific. What are the "unnecessary"
>> projects, and why?
>
> Projects that aren't needed to further Gentoo and are not helpful to
> users or developers.
Since Gentoo doesn't have any global goals, it's impossible to tell
what's furthering them a
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Now, perhaps what everyone would like, instead, would be status reports
> *where necessary* from certain projects?
>
> In fact, the council has been discussing asking a few projects about the
> status on some of their tasks. The main reason for this is for
> communicatio
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> Let's see, about 400 packages are handled by KDE herd. Not sure how many are
> currently handled by X11 herd after modular Xorg was addded,
Around 300, by Josh and me. The number of packages is completely
irrelevant on its own, you need to combine it with the am
> Basically, the person doing one or two commits a month *do not* need CVS
> access. They can still *contribute* at their current pace without
> having CVS access and a nice @gentoo.org email address.
Sorry, but as a dev who has lurked in the shadows for a long time, this
simply isn't globally tr
On 10/4/06, Kevin F. Quinn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 09:21:08 -0400
"Thomas Cort" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The "minority" arches like mips, sparc etc seem to get along quite
> > happily.
>
> Not the "minority" arches like m68k, s390, alpha, ...
I haven't seen any sign
On Wednesday 04 October 2006 17:10, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> At the same time,
> I dislike us having so much "competition" internally, as I think it
> helps to foster some of the conflict and ill will that many of us have
> towards each other.
It probably depends to which level of competition we'r
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 10:38 -0400, Thomas Cort wrote:
> > > - Double the number of developers with aggressive recruiting
> >
> > Why do people think that this is a good idea? I have a different one.
> > How about we *half* the number of developers, keeping the people who do
> > the most work, and
On Wed, 04 Oct 2006 09:41:45 -0400
Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Thomas Cort wrote:
> > - Drop all arches and Gentoo/Alt projects except Linux on amd64,
> > ppc32/64, sparc, and x86
>
> I can perhaps see some of this stuff dying. Like all of SPanKY's
> weird ass arches; I have no idea
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 15:34 +0200, Simon Stelling wrote:
> > What happened to working together? Should we work together instead of
> > competing against each other?
>
> Sometimes you want to achieve the same goal by totally different means.
> Sometimes there are good reasons for a complete new st
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 09:21:08 -0400
"Thomas Cort" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The "minority" arches like mips, sparc etc seem to get along quite
> > happily.
>
> Not the "minority" arches like m68k, s390, alpha, ...
I haven't seen any significant numbers of complaints. What exactly
about those
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 14:18:54 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 15:02:17 +0200 "Kevin F. Quinn"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> | Yuck. Devs should be free to add whatever packages they like,
> | provided they're willing to maintain them.
>
> There're already som
> - Double the number of developers with aggressive recruiting
Why do people think that this is a good idea? I have a different one.
How about we *half* the number of developers, keeping the people who do
the most work, and let everyone else contribute as members of the
community? Having develo
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 07:15 -0500, Brandon Low wrote:
> Remember when committing a big bug into the tree just wasn't that big of
> a deal, because it'd get fixed soon, and the people who updated often
> enough to care in the meantime would just laugh about it with you in
> #gentoo?
This is definit
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
>>> - Project status reports once a month for every project
>> Totally agree on this one!
>
> OK.
>
> I'll give you Release Engineering's "status reports" for September,
> October, and November:
>
> September: taking a well-d
On Wednesday 04 October 2006 07:21, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> I would say to drop everything bug sparc and ppc64, that seems to be the
> only arch teams that actually respond in a timely fashion to keywording
> requests.
too bad sparc is tied to old kernels and ppc64 toolchain is useless
> > - Project status reports once a month for every project
>
> Totally agree on this one!
OK.
I'll give you Release Engineering's "status reports" for September,
October, and November:
September: taking a well-deserved break
October: taking a well-deserved break
November: taking a well-deserve
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thomas Cort wrote:
> [. . ]
My, that's an awful lot of work on top of everything else we have to do. D'you
plan on getting us all paid, as well? That'd be motivation to stay and be even
more productive.
Also, it's not necessary for every dev to also
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 07:00 -0400, 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
Thomas Cort wrote:
> On 10/4/06, Luca Longinotti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The number of opened bugs has always been higher than the number of
> closed bugs in the bug stats listed in every 2006 GWN. How is this
> 'going forward'? It seems to me like we are falling behind.
That's not an indicat
On 10/4/06, Alec Warner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> - No competing projects
do we have any competing projects now?
I believe seeds competes with releng (since they both want to release
stage tarballs). Some people don't believe that the two projects
compete, but it isn't up for discussion in
Thomas Cort wrote:
The number of opened bugs has always been higher than the number of
closed bugs in the bug stats listed in every 2006 GWN. How is this
'going forward'? It seems to me like we are falling behind.
Take a closer look at the statistics. The numbers seem drastic, but once
you've
On Wednesday 04 October 2006 15:14, Thomas Cort wrote:
> On Gentoo we have to provide support for each possible combination of
> USE flags, CFLAGS, and compiler versions on 32-bit and 64-bit systems,
> on little endian and big endian systems, and with mix of stable and
> testing packages. Slackware
Okay, I didn't want to answer anymore to this thread because I really find it
suited for April 1st, not October 4th, but seems like I cannot...
On Wednesday 04 October 2006 15:10, Thomas Cort wrote:
> I was thinking something similar to what Ubuntu does,
> they provide the basics to do most thin
The "minority" arches like mips, sparc etc seem to get along quite happily.
Not the "minority" arches like m68k, s390, alpha, ...
> - Reduce the number of projects by eliminating the dead, weak,
> understaffed, and unnecessary projects
Weak: Be more specific. What are the "weak" projects, a
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 15:02:17 +0200 "Kevin F. Quinn"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Yuck. Devs should be free to add whatever packages they like,
| provided they're willing to maintain them.
There're already some restrictions:
http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/tree/index.html#what-belongs
On 10/4/06, Brandon Low <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What if the problem is too many devs instead of too few? Slackware
Linux is a comparatively simple to maintain distribution, but ONE person
does it. How many devs are on Gentoo now? 200? more? A close knit
group of college students and bored
On 10/4/06, Luca Longinotti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
People come and go, I still see Gentoo going forward, packages still get
updated, work gets done
The number of opened bugs has always been higher than the number of
closed bugs in the bug stats listed in every 2006 GWN. How is this
'going
Hi, everyone.
I'm not gentoo dev (yet), but I take the chance to vent an idea I have a
while, based on my personal experience in bugzilla.
On Wed, 2006-10-04 at 07:15 -0500, Brandon Low wrote:
> What if the problem is too many devs instead of too few? Slackware
> Linux is a comparatively simple
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 07:00:14 -0400
Thomas Cort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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.
Regarding the news stories - th
On 10/4/06, Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 07:00:14 -0400 Thomas Cort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| - Double the number of developers with aggressive recruiting
Aggressive recruiting isn't going to find you more competent people.
All it's going to do is increase the
On 10/4/06, Christian Heim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wednesday, 04. October. 2006 13:00, Thomas Cort wrote:
> - Devs can only belong to 5 projects at most
Reducing the stress on people ? No clue what that would solve.
There are developers who belong to many projects and do very little o
Thomas Cort wrote:
- Cut the number of packages in half (put the removed ebuilds in
community run overlays)
Removing part of the market will make us weaker, not stronger.
- Formal approval process (or at least strict criteria) for adding
new packages
Though I doubt bureaucracy will help, addi
As usual, sweeping new policies or procedures WILL NOT FIX THINGS.
Pretty much every commercial enterprize learns this eventually. New
rules from above don't fix problems, peolpe fix problems from below.
Gentoo has always been about close cooperation between core devs, new
devs and non devs. I t
Christian Heim wrote:
- Make every dev a member of at least 1 arch team
I think that would solve the understaffing of some of the arch teams (iirc
amd64 and x86 are having enough devs / at's right now)
No. We don't need more people on our dev lists, because it won't change
anything. What we
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.
People come and go, I still see Gentoo going forward, packages still get
updated, work
On Wed, 4 Oct 2006 07:00:14 -0400 Thomas Cort <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| - Double the number of developers with aggressive recruiting
Aggressive recruiting isn't going to find you more competent people.
All it's going to do is increase the moron quotient from its current
50% to 75%.
| - Reduce
On Wednesday, 04. October. 2006 13:00, 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,
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. W
On Wednesday 04 October 2006 13:00, Thomas Cort wrote:
> - Drop all arches and Gentoo/Alt projects except Linux on amd64,
> ppc32/64, sparc, and x86
I would say to drop everything bug sparc and ppc64, that seems to be the only
arch teams that actually respond in a timely fashion to keywording requ
78 matches
Mail list logo
