[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    [gentoo-dev] Community driven meta distribution or only distribution (was Re: Several portage trees)
From:       Mikael Andersson <snikkt () telia ! com>
Date:       2003-04-29 17:40:43
[Download RAW message or body]

Gentoo is moving to slow this is why this kind of ideas emerge. It might be 
moving fast, but obviously still too slow for many. I've got a few ebuilds 
done which i haven't even bothered to try to get in since i've seen the queue 
in bugzillla and I'm sure several others are in the same situation.

Communication between developers and users is always hard. Esp since many 
gentoo users isn't strictly users. Some of the points i make might sound a 
bit harsh - but try to smile while you read them - i think it will make 
gentoo a better distribution if you do .)

On Friday 25 April 2003 21.00, Robin H.Johnson wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 09:57:15PM +0200, kikov@fco-gimeno.com wrote:
> > Well... I'm a developer of a project. I have submitted via bugzilla
> > several bugs of one of the packages I need ( not from the project, just
> > a dependency ). Let see: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=2333
> > ohh, yeah, 2002-05-02 07:28 EST... One year ago...
> > The bug is still opened.
>
> Go back and read my posting about why many ebuilds don't get into the
> tree.

I didn't see a lot of comments about the ebuild not being up to par in 
bugzilla. Maybe if a developer seeing a build not beeing 'good-enough' could 
add a small note about this so we - The Users(tm)  - or in another word, the 
user community [3] can fix whats wrong. We aim to please ...

> Subject = Re: [gentoo-dev] Ebuilds not getting in :(
> Date = Tue, 22 Apr 2003 15:36:55 -0700
>
> If you fix those issues, and fix that ebuild.
> Things to fix:
> add SLOT, add KEYWORDS, add IUSE, 'use foo' statement style, use PATCHES
> instead of patch+src_unpack, local variable declarations, unnessicary
> statement block in src_install, broken homepage URI, ALL documentation
> with the package should be installed (manpages and even the guys pgp
> key) , einstall instead of 'make install' and most importantly EBUILD
> CHANGELOG!!!!!

No need to yell, instead add that information to [1]. In a way it's written in 
[2] but as that is targeted for developers it's hard to know whether or not 
I'm required to add that to my update, and if i should attach another file 
with the entire changelog/changelog entry. And equally important, somebody 
with the proper knowledge should get lintool online again. Apparently it's 
broken ( see warnings in [2] ) and sure enough it reports errors for 
baselayout and other core packages so it's probably at least somewhat broken.

>
> > I have come back to the new versions of the software... In a completely
> > new system, and the ebuild works fine.
>
> Is libcap even actively maintained still? If not and it is not widely
> used, then it is not likely to get into the tree at all.

Maybe Larry the cow will stop using gentoo then ? After all he liked being in 
control. If the users isn't in control gentoo will stop beeing bleeding edge 
and maybe end up only bleeding.

What are the purpose of being a meta distribution if only widely used packages 
get into the tree ?

>
> If you resolve all of the above issues, and the package is still widely
> used (I want some proof of this), then I'll take the ebuild and maintain
> it in portage myself.

Well, this is a problem since not all packages wanting to be in portage will 
be widely used. But i have hopes that these kind of problems will be resolved 
with the restructuring of ebuild submission and maintainance in progress.

>
> Update the bug with your new ebuild and mark the old ones obsolete.

[1] http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/ebuild-submit.xml
[2] http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-howto.xml
[3] http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/about.xml

/Mikael 'snikkt' Andersson

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]