From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1EedRy-0008Au-J0 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 19:05:07 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with SMTP id jAMJ34MZ023838; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 19:03:04 GMT Received: from smtp04.gnvlscdb.sys.nuvox.net (smtp.nuvox.net [64.89.70.9]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id jAMJ0H7A003066 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 19:00:18 GMT Received: from cgianelloni.nuvox.net (216.215.202.4.nw.nuvox.net [216.215.202.4]) by smtp04.gnvlscdb.sys.nuvox.net (8.12.11/8.12.11) with SMTP id jAMJ0WBQ017372 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2005 14:00:32 -0500 Received: by cgianelloni.nuvox.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 22 Nov 2005 13:59:11 -0500 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Decision to remove stage1/2 from installation documentation From: Chris Gianelloni To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <200511222310.57270.abhay.ilugd@gmail.com> References: <20051122144745.GR12982@mail.lieber.org> <20051122161955.GA15198@halffull.org> <1132677570.27288.46.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <200511222310.57270.abhay.ilugd@gmail.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-nEwg5+osK4Udgu1C1Y83" Organization: Gentoo Linux Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 13:59:10 -0500 Message-Id: <1132685950.27288.76.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.4.1 X-Archives-Salt: 844a07da-2fcc-494a-8d24-68cd916941b3 X-Archives-Hash: a80d1d8b25cb967d730cf2b70e0d0ae4 --=-nEwg5+osK4Udgu1C1Y83 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 23:10 +0530, Abhay Kedia wrote: > On Tuesday 22 Nov 2005 10:09 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > *sigh* > > > > Another "Gentoo is about choice" argument. Can I ask you something? > > Where does it say that Gentoo is about choice? I see lots of places > > that say that Gentoo allows you to customize, but nowhere do I see > > anything that says that we are about choice. >=20 > I am a really novice desktop end-user and am following gentoo-dev just fo= r=20 > learning what all goes through the minds of the uber gentoo developers. I= =20 > have no say in this discussion as it doesn't effect me and am certainly n= ot=20 > qualified to get into an argument with someone like you but I have read y= our=20 > posts mentioning this "Where does it say that Gentoo is about choice?"=20 > argument lots of time. You have just as much right to speak your mind as I. We aren't special because we're developers. We're all just Gentoo users like you. We just contribute our time to improve Gentoo. If you file bug reports or participate in discussions here, then you're doing the same. > Till now I also had a picture in my mind that Gentoo was actually about=20 > "choice" and when I saw that picture getting shattered by a Lead Develope= r, I=20 > went to look for the places that made me think about Gentoo in that way i= .e.=20 > "Gentoo is about choice". These are the few things I could find. The problem with the "Gentoo is about choice" argument is that it is used to back up any argument where there's not really a good reason for making the changes *except* for choice. > 1) On the about page with picture of "Larry The Cow":=20 > http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/about.xml > "He discovered lots of up-to-date packages that could be auto-built > using the optimizations settings and build-time functionality that > he wanted, rather than what some distro creator thought would be > best for him. All of the sudden, Larry the Cow was in control. And > he liked it." > ---rather than what some distro creator thought would be > best for him. > ^ that statement makes you think it is about choice. It can imply that, but it does not state it. Also, remember that having the *ability* to enact change yourself to make things the way you want is not the same as developers being *forced* to do something simply so you have a choice. As I stated before, you're more than able to take a stage3 tarball + catalyst + the example catalyst spec files and build your own stage1 tarball. In fact, this is the exact same procedure that Release Engineering uses in building these tarballs to begin with. So the "choice" is still there. > 2) The Philosophy: http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/philosophy.xml > "If the tool forces the user to do things a particular way, then the tool= is=20 > working against, rather than for, the user." Again, you're still free to do what you chose using the tools we provide... ...or are you calling *me* a tool? ;P > 3) Gentoo Social Contract: http://www.gentoo.org/main/en/contract.xml > "A Gentoo operating system should satisfy the self-hosting requirement. I= n=20 > other words, the operating system should be able to build itself from scr= atch=20 > using the aforementioned tools and metadata. If a product associated with= an=20 > official Gentoo project does not satisfy these requirements, the product = does=20 > not qualify as a Gentoo operating system." Removing stage1 instructions doesn't go against this in any way. > All these things "imply" that there should be a choice for a user to do w= hat=20 > ever way he/she wants while building his/her system i.e. even from scratc= h. Nowhere have I suggested a method of change that would remove this "choice" from the users. The problem is that people are confusing "choice" with "developers doing it for me". Just because *I* don't build a stage1 tarball, or just because the instructions are not in the Handbook, does not mean that you cannot still perform a stage1 installation. All of the tools for you to do this are still there, you just have to take the time to use them. > Since these documents just implied the "Choice" nature of Gentoo, I went = ahead=20 > and did some googling to actually get the direct connection. Searching fo= r=20 > "gentoo about choice" leads 653,000 results and just the first two result= s=20 > are enough to get the point across for a user. They implied it. They did not state it. However, it was pointed out to me that the Handbook, does indeed have the "Gentoo is about choice" mantra in it. I plan on filing a bug against the Handbook to have this changed to something a bit closer to fact, which I will explain a bit further below. > 1) From 1st Link: > Gentoo Weekly Newsletter: March 28th, 2005 > http://www.gentoo.org/news/en/gwn/20050328-newsletter.xml > Developer of the week talks > "Gentoo represents choice and freedom for every user to build their compu= ting=20 > environment to their individual needs, by giving them the tools to do it.= " --=20 > Marcus D. Hanwell (cryos) Right. Giving them the tools. It doesn't say being forced to do something they think is a bad idea and to continue bad practices simply to ease user issues with the choices that they have made. Also, a single developer's statement does not speak for the entire project. What Marcus has to say speaks for the entire project no more than what I say does, which is that I only speak for myself. > 2) From 2nd Link: > Trusted Gentoo : by Daniel Black > http://www.gentoo.org/news/20050202-trustedgentoo.xml > "Gentoo is about choice" >=20 > The last link should settle it for you? Not really. > Can we now comfortably say that "Gentoo is about choice"? The other 652,9= 98=20 > links might reveal a few more places where we can get the choice idea fro= m=20 > but I hope that all these links should be sufficient to give anyone this=20 > idea. No. I think instead we should say that Gentoo is about empowerment. Allow me to explain. Saying that Gentoo is about choice implies that we will take any patches or any feature requests, no matter how pointless or useless, and increase our workload, simply to give our users more "choice". This is, in fact, extremely far from the truth. Instead, we give the users the tools that they need to accomplish what they want. We *empower* them to make choices. If you want a stage1 tarball, make one. Don't like our choices of kernel sources? Add your own to an overlay. Just because you have the ability to enact a change does not mean that we should be forced to put it into the main distribution and *support* it. Because of this, Gentoo is definitely *not* about choice, but is about *empowering* our users to make choices. They're only subtly different, but it is that difference that keeps Gentoo running. Check bugs.gentoo.org for WONTFIX resolution codes. Look for places where we have refused to add features unless they were adopted by upstream. You will find countless examples of us *refusing* to add choices to ensure the quality of Gentoo as a whole. --=20 Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux --=-nEwg5+osK4Udgu1C1Y83 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBDg2p+kT4lNIS36YERAp5sAKCb45PsAkzpkcUIFTv5uUF2kYPnOgCgvrnV 7HETlb3XWjJ/h0FE+VGeHx8= =k382 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-nEwg5+osK4Udgu1C1Y83-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list