public inbox for gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Florian Schmaus <flow@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: Flow's Manifesto and questions for nominees (was: Re: [gentoo-project] Gentoo Council Election 202306 ... Nominations Open in Just Over 24 Hours.)
Date: Wed, 12 Jul 2023 21:06:21 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1913d3c2-5f54-acea-0ed3-930371ea1884@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <cdf5ddb7-8f65-74cf-5594-3e3eec86c915@gentoo.org>


[-- Attachment #1.1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2946 bytes --]

Apologies for not replying to everyone individually.

I thank my fellow council candidates who took the time to reply to this 
sensitive and obviously controversial matter. I understand that not 
everyone feels comfortable taking a stance in this discussion.

I asked the other council candidates about their opinion on EGO_SUM. 
Unfortunately, some replies included only a rather shallow answer. A few 
focused on criticism of my actions and how I approach the issue. Which 
is obviously fine. I read it all and have empathy for everyone who feels 
aggravated. You may or may not share the complaints. But let us focus on 
the actual matter for a moment.

Even the voices raised for a restricted reintroduction of EGO_SUM just 
mention an abstract limit [1]. A concrete limit is not mentioned, 
although I asked for it and provided my idea including specific limits. 
Not knowing the concrete figures others have in mind makes it difficult 
to find a compromise. For example, a fellow council candidate postulated 
that it would be quicker for me to implement a limit-check in pkgcheck 
than discuss EGO_SUM. I wish that were the case. Unfortunately it is 
potentially not trivial to implement if we want such a check to be 
robust. But even worse, a specific limit must be known before 
implementing such a check. And we currently have none.

But the real crux of an EGO_SUM reintroduction with a limit is the 
following. Either the limit is too restrictive, and most packages are 
affected by it and can not use EGO_SUM, which ultimately only 
corresponds to the current state. Or the limit only affects a fraction 
of the packages, so you should not bother having a limit.

The deprecation of EGO_SUM was and is unnecessary, a security issue, and 
was almost wholly *not* driven by technical problems. EGO_SUM should be 
re-instated.

I know that some think likewise. I also know that others disagree. The 
latter group includes some prominent and visible Gentoo developers. 
People to whom I am thankful for their work on Gentoo and to whom Gentoo 
owes a lot. However, it is unclear what the majority of Gentoo 
developers thinks. I could very well be that the consensus amongst 
Gentoo developers agrees with some of my fellow council candidates and 
would like to keep the current state. It would be great if we find that 
out. If we had a mechanism to perform a non-binding opinion poll amongst 
Gentoo developers, and if that poll turns out that the consensus is to 
keep EGO_SUM deprecated, then I could save myself a lot of time and effort.

However, as of now, my conscience demands that I try to improve this 
situation for the sake of our users. In a previous mail, I wrote that I 
seek closure by asking the council to vote on that matter. And I will, 
of course, accept any outcome of that vote.

- Flow


1: Sorry if I have missed something. If so, then please let me know.

[-- Attachment #1.1.2: OpenPGP public key --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-keys, Size: 17843 bytes --]

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 618 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-07-12 19:07 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 57+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-06-15 16:05 [gentoo-project] Gentoo Council Election 202306 ... Nominations Open in Just Over 24 Hours Roy Bamford
2023-06-17  8:37 ` Arthur Zamarin
2023-06-17 16:23   ` Toralf Förster
2023-06-18 19:46   ` Ionen Wolkens
2023-06-21 18:46   ` Sam James
2023-06-21 21:06   ` Ulrich Mueller
2023-06-24 18:22   ` John Helmert III
2023-07-08 22:23     ` John Helmert III
2023-06-25  5:08   ` Joonas Niilola
2023-06-25  8:51   ` Andreas K. Huettel
2023-06-25 23:18   ` Matt Turner
2023-06-26 13:46   ` Michał Górny
2023-06-27  9:31   ` David Seifert
2023-06-27 13:35   ` Jakov Smolić
2023-06-28  9:51   ` Florian Schmaus
2023-06-28 14:46     ` Sam James
2023-07-08 10:10     ` Flow's Manifesto and questions for nominees (was: Re: [gentoo-project] Gentoo Council Election 202306 ... Nominations Open in Just Over 24 Hours.) Florian Schmaus
2023-07-08 12:33       ` Michał Górny
2023-07-08 21:29         ` Sam James
2023-07-09  3:21         ` Michał Górny
2023-07-08 20:22       ` [gentoo-project] Re: Flow's Manifesto and questions for nominees Ulrich Mueller
2023-07-08 21:29       ` Flow's Manifesto and questions for nominees (was: Re: [gentoo-project] Gentoo Council Election 202306 ... Nominations Open in Just Over 24 Hours.) David Seifert
2023-07-08 22:50       ` John Helmert III
2023-07-09 14:21       ` Matt Turner
2023-07-12 19:06       ` Florian Schmaus [this message]
2023-07-12 19:28         ` Alec Warner
2023-07-14  7:14           ` Florian Schmaus
2023-07-14  7:33             ` Sam James
2023-07-14  8:19               ` Sam James
2023-06-30 16:39   ` [gentoo-project] Gentoo Council Election 202306 ... Nominations Open in Just Over 24 Hours Andreas Sturmlechner
2023-07-01 22:42   ` David Seifert
2023-06-17 14:41 ` Florian Schmaus
2023-06-17 14:58   ` Arthur Zamarin
2023-06-17 16:19   ` James Le Cuirot
2023-06-19 13:44   ` Pacho Ramos
2023-06-20 10:16   ` Florian Schmaus
2023-06-21 17:32     ` Arsen Arsenović
2023-06-21  7:05   ` Guilherme Amadio
2023-06-23 19:53   ` Patrick McLean
2023-06-24 21:58   ` Conrad Kostecki
2023-06-29 13:28   ` Mike Gilbert
2023-06-30  6:35 ` Robin H. Johnson
2023-06-30  7:24   ` Maciej Barć
2023-06-30  8:46   ` Andrew Ammerlaan
2023-06-30  8:56   ` Hans de Graaff
2023-06-30 10:21   ` Mike Pagano
2023-06-30 12:30   ` David Abbott
2023-06-30 15:18   ` Jimi Huotari
2023-06-30 16:10   ` Roy Bamford
2023-06-30 20:29   ` Alfredo Tupone
2023-07-01  0:04   ` Rich Freeman
2023-07-03 20:02   ` Marek Szuba
2023-06-30 21:59 ` [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] " Patrick Lauer
2023-07-08 18:06 ` Arthur Zamarin
2023-07-09  3:36   ` Michał Górny
2023-07-09 14:09   ` Matt Turner
2023-07-09 17:47   ` [gentoo-project] " Ulrich Mueller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1913d3c2-5f54-acea-0ed3-930371ea1884@gentoo.org \
    --to=flow@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox