Re: [gentoo-dev] Official overlay support

[Luis Medinas <metalgod@gentoo.org>]

On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 22:03 +0000, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> I'd like to offer two wiki engines and two version control systems on
> overlays.g.o.  I believe that gives us enough choice without us
> loading the box with too much software for us to keep on top of.
> 
> One thing that was never planned was any form of shell access to this
> box, except for the team creating/destroying overlays.  It looks like
> this will be necessary to support a distributed vcs.  I'll talk to
> infra and see what we could do about providing some form of ssh access
> to help us support a distributed vcs.
> 
> Trac and SVN would be my first choice.  MoinMoin would be my
> recommendation for the second wiki engine.  What should the second
> version control system be?  I don't use them, I have no experience
> with them, and so I have no preference of what this should be.
> 
> To answer Daniel's question about "official" ... the overlays hosted
> on overlays.g.o would be "official".  The "overlays" project will be
> accountable for overlays.g.o overall.  It would make sense for the
> "overlays" project to be a sub-project of infra.
> 
> To ensure "officialness" and (what I personally care more about)
> accountability, project overlays will be created for projects that
> meet the description of a project in the metastructure [1].  The
> overlays team will have to be strict on this, to ensure
> "officialness".  The overlay must be requested by one of the leads of
> the project.  The lead(s) would be jointly accountable for the overlay
> and all its contents.  Leads will be able to ask for commit / wiki
> edit access for non-devs.
> 
> Developer overlays would only be created for active Gentoo developers,
> and they would be accountable for its contents.  Non-developers will
> not be given write access to developer overlays.
> 
> By default - working on the same principle of trust that governs all
> developers w.r.t. the Portage tree - all developers will be able to
> commit to all overlays.  If we can't trust you to respect other
> people's overlays, then we can't trust you with commit access to the
> Portage tree, and you're not fit to be a Gentoo dev in the first place
> :P  The only "restriction" will be that you'll need to ask the overlay
> project team to setup your access the very first time.
> 
> Anyone wanting a "secret" overlay needs to make their own hosting arrangements.
> 
> To answer Daniel's other question, about bugs.g.o ... trac on
> overlays.g.o will have its bug tracking system disabled.  We already
> have one bug tracking system - bugs.g.o - and that's sufficient.
> 
> [1] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0039.html

Hi Stuart

I agree with the wiki because it seems to be an easy way to users and
developers comunicate together and work. Like i said a few months ago
the documentation won't give any problems to GDP since GDP provides high
level docs. The wiki will also help our projects since it can be added
TODO's, roadmaps and all that stuff. About the overlay the best way imo
is provide a unique overlay with external contribs maintained by users
and devs (of course commit rights only for devs.).

-- 
Luis Medinas <metalgod@gentoo.org>
http://dev.gentoo.org/~metalgod
Gentoo Linux Developer: AMD64,Printing,Media-Optical,Sound

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list