Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation (was: Project Sunrise resumed)

[Seemant Kulleen <seemant@gentoo.org>]

On Sun, 2006-07-30 at 23:50 -0400, Brett I. Holcomb wrote:
> My concern is beyond me.  As I  stated I know enough about what to expect IF I 
> use sunrise.  But many do not and with it becoming official people figure 
> it's gentoo and when it breaks Gentoo suffers.  Gentoo has a reputation as a 
> good solid, stable distro.  As user and big fan of Gentoo I'm concerned - why 
> couldn't sunrise have stayed unoffical like BMG.  Why does it have to be 
> official?  Gentoo can choose to do what it feels is right and I will do the 
> same.

BMG has, from day 1, been marginalised in the Gentoo community.  I
always fancied that they should've been folded into the larger Gentoo
projects and become what Sunrise is today.  The way I read you, your
fear is based on the possibility of some future perception by an unknown
number of people.  Sunrise's idea is that stuff gets checked and
re-checked and remains accessible -- have you read through their site
and their commit histories and changesets?  They're not exactly
dawdling.

As for Gentoo's reputation, I'm actually pleasantly surprised to hear it
characterised that way :)  If it has that reputation, then it will
actually take a lot to break that.  I'm surprised that ~keywords didn't
already break it.   I agree that the official portage tree is a QA
nightmare. Sunrise seems to be nipping that nightmare for a future date
-- ie by allowing people to commit and perform peer reviews, they're
grooming the next generation of developers to look at QA from the
outset, instead of as an afterthought.

> I answered only because someone asked for user's concerns well this is mine 
> and you all can do with the input as you please without any hard feelings on 
> my part.

It's an exchange of ideas, there shouldn't be hard feelings on anyone's
part.


-- 
Seemant Kulleen <seemant@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Foundation / Gentoo Linux

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list