RE: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

RE: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Sean P. Kane]

Why do you all read so much into it? Culprit, was the wrong choice of
words, but the email was neither mean or bad-spirited. It was obvious he
was just saying that this should be masked quickly to avoid a lot of
users running into this problem. The east/west refernce is simply
juvinille. Having spent a great many years in both places, I can testify
that it is a meaningless and inaccurate stereotype anyways. All this
does is point out the real lesson to be learned here. Gentoo may be
"cutting-edge", but the stability problems MUST be fixed, expecially in
Portafge, because if it breaks, it can leave a system in a very
difficult to recover state. We should all display enough maturity to not
label email headers "SERIOUSLY fucked up ?", avoid labeling people, and
simply work at fixing the problems and moving on. Those of us who need
stable systems for the moment, need to be much more cautious about
upgrading our systems, until Gentoo has a better system to ensure stable
releases.

Sean

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sean P. Kane
spkane@genomatica.com
Lead Infrastructure Architect
Genomatica, Inc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"When we destroy something man has created we call it vandalism......
When we destroy something that Gaia has created we call it progress."


-----Original Message-----
From: Henti Smith [mailto:bain@tcsn.co.za] 
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 10:35
To: Adam Voigt
Cc: drobbins@gentoo.org; veldy@veldy.net; aurelien@gouny.org;
kdolkas@telecom.ntua.gr; gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; manson@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?


On 17 Dec 2002 11:15:15 -0500
Adam Voigt <adam@cryptocomm.com> wrote:

> How about not sterotyping?

I'm not steriotyping. Just saying why fight when working together can
solve the problem without getting all worked up about it.

> Not all western'ers want to blame people and not all eastern'ers are
> so forgiving.

> How about you find out who did it, to help them realize there mistake
> and not make it again, then fix the problem?

since I haven't emerged this portage I don't have this problem. fixing
something that is not borken on my system is pretty hard. I also don't
think the person responcible.

Henti 

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Portage and QA

[Daniel Robbins]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1289 bytes --]

On Tue, 2002-12-17 at 12:40, Sean P. Kane wrote:
> All this
> does is point out the real lesson to be learned here. Gentoo may be
> "cutting-edge", but the stability problems MUST be fixed, expecially in
> Portafge, because if it breaks, it can leave a system in a very
> difficult to recover state. 

We actually have a good QA procedure in place for Portage. The problem
was caused by a senior developer doing things that he shouldn't and not
following this procedure. 

Again, I don't want to make this person feel worse than he already does
(and he does feel bad about his error in judgement.) I sharing this info
for the sole purpose of letting everyone know that normally this problem
would have been caught way before it hit end-users, and that we *do*
have a QA procedure in place for Portage.

Today, I've made extra sure that all our devs are very clear on the
rules regarding new Portage releases. I've done what's necessary to help
ensure that issues like this are avoided in the future. I am now going
to incorporate these details regarding Portage QA into our official
policy documentation on the Web site so that future developers will do
the right thing too.

Sincerely,

-- 
Daniel Robbins
Chief Architect, Gentoo Linux
http://www.gentoo.org

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] portage-2.0.45-r6 SERIOUSLY fucked up ?

[Ragnar Hojland Espinosa]

On Tue, Dec 17, 2002 at 11:40:00AM -0800, Sean P. Kane wrote:

> Portafge, because if it breaks, it can leave a system in a very
> difficult to recover state. We should all display enough maturity to not
> label email headers "SERIOUSLY fucked up ?", avoid labeling people, and
> simply work at fixing the problems and moving on. Those of us who need

Since I wrote the original subject, I feel addressed.  What does maturity
have to do with a program that (was) fucked up?  

     - It was broken? Yes.
     - It broke earlier versions? Yes.
     - It broke the system too? Yes.
     - Did the recovery involve infrequent procedures? Yes.

I'd say it being seriously fucked up was a good description, right? [0]
Anyway, I'm only interested in people not getting bitten by it.  I shall
not reply anything else about this.

[0] Now, the other possibility is that you dont like to read that word.  In
    that case I suggest you to sed your emails and dont ever look at
    dictionaries.  Or pluck your eyes out ;) 
-- 
Ragnar Hojland - Project Manager
Linalco "Especialistas Linux y en Software Libre"
http://www.linalco.com Tel: +34-91-5970074 Fax: +34-91-5970083

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list