[gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed

[gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed

[Stefan Schweizer]

To my fellow Gentoo developers and users,

Sunrise is about contributing ebuilds and getting feedback and review while
doing so. The main resource this currently happens for is the Gentoo User
Overlay of Sunrise and second come ebuilds that get into portage afterwards

In last weeks council meeting [1] it was decided that the Sunrise project is
no longer suspended. I can give a short overview of the current status of
the overlay:

- we currently have 154 ebuilds in 58 categories in the overlay
  not counting the ebuilds that got into portage and were removed again

- we have 8 developers, 4 trusted committers who have taken the ebuild quiz
  and 26 users committing to the overlay

The basic project concept of creating a social workspace has been reached.
#gentoo-sunrise is an active IRC channel where users usually find help
quickly and it also forms a friendly community.

Best regards,
Stefan

[1]     http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20060720-summary.txt
        http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20060720.txt
Other useful resources:
Project page http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/sunrise/
svn reviewed http://www.gentoo-sunrise.org/svn/reviewed/
cia page     http://cia.navi.cx/stats/project/sunrise/

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed

[Stephen P. Becker]

Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> In last weeks council meeting [1] it was decided that the Sunrise project is
> no longer suspended. I can give a short overview of the current status of
> the overlay:
> 
> - we currently have 154 ebuilds in 58 categories in the overlay
>   not counting the ebuilds that got into portage and were removed again
> 
> - we have 8 developers, 4 trusted committers who have taken the ebuild quiz
>   and 26 users committing to the overlay
> 
> The basic project concept of creating a social workspace has been reached.
> #gentoo-sunrise is an active IRC channel where users usually find help
> quickly and it also forms a friendly community.
 >
> [1]     http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20060720-summary.txt
>         http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20060720.txt

Errrr....so since when did we have the discussion where you actually 
addressed all of the numerous concerns brought forth right before this 
project was initially suspended?  Looking at the meeting log, the 
council even noted that the concerns had not been addressed, yet still 
voted to un-suspend anyway.  WTF?

-Steve
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: Project Sunrise resumed

[Stefan Schweizer]

Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> Errrr....so since when did we have the discussion where you actually
> addressed all of the numerous concerns brought forth right before this
> project was initially suspended?

Do you have any concrete concerns that have not been dealt with yet? I would
like to hear about them in that case.

I have so far as good as possible implemented suggestions and answered
concerns.

- Stefan

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Henrik Brix Andersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1266 bytes --]

To my former fellow Gentoo developers and users,

On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 11:58:09PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> To my fellow Gentoo developers and users,
> 
> In last weeks council meeting [1] it was decided that the Sunrise project is
> no longer suspended. I can give a short overview of the current status of
> the overlay:

Seeing this I'd like to resign as a Gentoo developer.

Thank you to all the developers and users who have made the last two
years a fun period of my life in OSS. You all know who you are. I'll
miss you guys and gals.

I wish the remaining developers good luck with keeping Gentoo Linux
among the top GNU/Linux distributions out there.

I can be reached at henrik@brixandersen.dk should anybody have any
questions to the ebuilds, I used to maintain. Sorry about dumping the
ebuilds on the people who kindly took over when I announced my present
hiatus - but I'm sure you'll do a good job at maintaining them.

I have an unfinished draft for a pcmcia-cs to pcmciautils migration
howto sitting in my home dir - I'd appreciate if someone would step
up and finish it.

So long and thank you for all the fish,
Brix
-- 
Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 211 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Josh Saddler]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> To my former fellow Gentoo developers and users,
> 
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 11:58:09PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
>> To my fellow Gentoo developers and users,
>>
>> In last weeks council meeting [1] it was decided that the Sunrise project is
>> no longer suspended. I can give a short overview of the current status of
>> the overlay:
> 
> Seeing this I'd like to resign as a Gentoo developer.
> 
> Thank you to all the developers and users who have made the last two
> years a fun period of my life in OSS. You all know who you are. I'll
> miss you guys and gals.
> 
> I wish the remaining developers good luck with keeping Gentoo Linux
> among the top GNU/Linux distributions out there.
> 
> I can be reached at henrik@brixandersen.dk should anybody have any
> questions to the ebuilds, I used to maintain. Sorry about dumping the
> ebuilds on the people who kindly took over when I announced my present
> hiatus - but I'm sure you'll do a good job at maintaining them.
> 
> I have an unfinished draft for a pcmcia-cs to pcmciautils migration
> howto sitting in my home dir - I'd appreciate if someone would step
> up and finish it.
> 
> So long and thank you for all the fish,
> Brix
i'll miss you greatly, brix. You made my laptop and wireless (madwifi) worlds
much much happier places. i'm on devaway, but when I'm back, if no one else has
done it, i'll xmlify your pcmciautils doc -- you were the one who took the time
to explain to me that -utils wouldn't bite this longterm -cs user. :)

good luck in all your future endeavors. hope i see you around irc.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEya7mrsJQqN81j74RAp9ZAKCWdFKPX11wlwHCjQV/eBZ1PtzkzACfTZk/
lXGQZS2wZq3NkZyvXpp1ZZw=
=EozF
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Henrik Brix Andersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 658 bytes --]

On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 11:31:28PM -0700, Josh Saddler wrote:
> i'll miss you greatly, brix. You made my laptop and wireless (madwifi) worlds
> much much happier places. i'm on devaway, but when I'm back, if no one else has
> done it, i'll xmlify your pcmciautils doc -- you were the one who took the time
> to explain to me that -utils wouldn't bite this longterm -cs user. :)

It's already XMLified - it just needs someone to write a few sentences :)

> good luck in all your future endeavors. hope i see you around irc.

Thank you.

Regards,
Brix
-- 
Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 211 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1480 bytes --]

On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 18:21 -0400, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> > In last weeks council meeting [1] it was decided that the Sunrise project is
> > no longer suspended. I can give a short overview of the current status of
> > the overlay:
> > 
> > - we currently have 154 ebuilds in 58 categories in the overlay
> >   not counting the ebuilds that got into portage and were removed again
> > 
> > - we have 8 developers, 4 trusted committers who have taken the ebuild quiz
> >   and 26 users committing to the overlay
> > 
> > The basic project concept of creating a social workspace has been reached.
> > #gentoo-sunrise is an active IRC channel where users usually find help
> > quickly and it also forms a friendly community.
>  >
> > [1]     http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20060720-summary.txt
> >         http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20060720.txt
> 
> Errrr....so since when did we have the discussion where you actually 
> addressed all of the numerous concerns brought forth right before this 
> project was initially suspended?  Looking at the meeting log, the 
> council even noted that the concerns had not been addressed, yet still 
> voted to un-suspend anyway.  WTF?
> 

I don't seem to remember this.  I do though seem to remember that I
noted that there was complaints, but died away after Mike asked to
actually give some concrete feedback.


-- 
Martin Schlemmer


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

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

[Christel Dahlskjaer]

On Fri, 2006-07-28 at 01:55 +0200, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> To my former fellow Gentoo developers and users,
> 
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 11:58:09PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> > To my fellow Gentoo developers and users,
> > 
> > In last weeks council meeting [1] it was decided that the Sunrise project is
> > no longer suspended. I can give a short overview of the current status of
> > the overlay:
> 
> Seeing this I'd like to resign as a Gentoo developer.
> 
> Thank you to all the developers and users who have made the last two
> years a fun period of my life in OSS. You all know who you are. I'll
> miss you guys and gals.
> 
> I wish the remaining developers good luck with keeping Gentoo Linux
> among the top GNU/Linux distributions out there.
> 
> I can be reached at henrik@brixandersen.dk should anybody have any
> questions to the ebuilds, I used to maintain. Sorry about dumping the
> ebuilds on the people who kindly took over when I announced my present
> hiatus - but I'm sure you'll do a good job at maintaining them.
> 
> I have an unfinished draft for a pcmcia-cs to pcmciautils migration
> howto sitting in my home dir - I'd appreciate if someone would step
> up and finish it.
> 
> So long and thank you for all the fish,

I'm terribly sorry to see you go Henrik, I hope I'll see you around
IRC. 


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Henrik Brix Andersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1172 bytes --]

On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 11:35:24AM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> Mike asked you repeatedly to voice your issues or concerns in relation
> to Project Sunrise, which you failed to reply to.

How many times are we supposed to raise our concerns about a project
whose founders already agreed to run their project as an unofficial
project on non-gentoo infrastructure? Did you miss the logs from the
devrel + sunrise meeting where genstef and jokey agreed to this?

I simply had no idea the Gentoo Council even remotely considered
taking Project Sunrise on as an official project.

> Also, I do not remember you even attending the meeting or asking to
> speak there, so this really seems a tad unreasonable or impulsive.

Same as above - had I known that you guys actually intended to revert
your own ruling from the previous meeting along with the consensus
reached on the devrel + sunrise meeting I would have been there to
raise my concerns.

No big deal, though. Best of luck to all of you, including the people
behind Project Sunrise.

Regards,
Brix
-- 
Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 211 bytes --]

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

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1824 bytes --]

On Fri, 2006-07-28 at 12:02 +0200, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 11:35:24AM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> > Mike asked you repeatedly to voice your issues or concerns in relation
> > to Project Sunrise, which you failed to reply to.
> 
> How many times are we supposed to raise our concerns about a project
> whose founders already agreed to run their project as an unofficial
> project on non-gentoo infrastructure? Did you miss the logs from the
> devrel + sunrise meeting where genstef and jokey agreed to this?
> 

Apparently they changed their minds, as Mike did state (as well as
genstef) in that thread.

> I simply had no idea the Gentoo Council even remotely considered
> taking Project Sunrise on as an official project.
> 

Err, I miss to comprehend above???  You saw the item on the meeting
agenda, made vague complaints, but yet did not know about this?

> > Also, I do not remember you even attending the meeting or asking to
> > speak there, so this really seems a tad unreasonable or impulsive.
> 
> Same as above - had I known that you guys actually intended to revert
> your own ruling from the previous meeting along with the consensus
> reached on the devrel + sunrise meeting I would have been there to
> raise my concerns.
> 

Ditto, same again as above.  I cannot see how you can state you did not
know about it when you did actually complain about re-evaluating it.

> No big deal, though. Best of luck to all of you, including the people
> behind Project Sunrise.
> 

Do not get me wrong, the little I worked with you was not unpleasant or
anything, and I really have no need or want to see you go, but your
reasoning just do not add up.

Anyhow, good luck whichever way you choose to go.


Regards,

-- 
Martin Schlemmer


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

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

[Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 417 bytes --]

On Friday 28 July 2006 01:55, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> So long and thank you for all the fish,
> Brix
I really hate to return home from a long weekend to read these kind of emails.

I'm very sad to see you go, you really improved alot on the wireless experience!

Good luck with your future projects and I hope we'll share a beer some day:-)

-- 
Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen
Gentoo Linux Security Team

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

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

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1945 bytes --]

On Friday 28 July 2006 06:02, Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 28, 2006 at 11:35:24AM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> > Mike asked you repeatedly to voice your issues or concerns in relation
> > to Project Sunrise, which you failed to reply to.
>
> How many times are we supposed to raise our concerns about a project
> whose founders already agreed to run their project as an unofficial
> project on non-gentoo infrastructure? Did you miss the logs from the
> devrel + sunrise meeting where genstef and jokey agreed to this?

as the thread on gentoo-dev was named:
	sunrise, a temporary compromise
looks to me like most people (rightly) thought of the meeting as resulting in 
a temporary solution

> I simply had no idea the Gentoo Council even remotely considered
> taking Project Sunrise on as an official project.

complete garbage

if you arent reading the e-mails on the gentoo-dev list which were in reply to 
your own postings, then that is simply your own fault ... i was cc-ing you to 
make sure you saw those e-mails, and your reaction was:
PS: There is no need to CC: me on replies. Please use reply-to-list.

> > Also, I do not remember you even attending the meeting or asking to
> > speak there, so this really seems a tad unreasonable or impulsive.
>
> Same as above - had I known

same as above, complete garbage

> that you guys actually intended to revert 
> your own ruling from the previous meeting along with the consensus
> reached on the devrel + sunrise meeting I would have been there to
> raise my concerns.

reverting a temporary suspension ?  what a crazy idea

there were many threads asking for people to look at the latest Sunrise state 
and comment/complain/whatever with no more negative responses ... if 
developers arent posting negative feedback and issues appear to be resolved 
on gentoo-dev, then what else would you expect the Council to do ?
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 393 bytes --]

On Thursday 27 July 2006 18:21, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> Looking at the meeting log, the
> council even noted that the concerns had not been addressed

no, we noted that people claimed they had concerns but when cornered and asked 
what exactly their concerns were, no more responses were to be had

people need to bring up their outstanding issues now and get them addressed
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

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

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 17:51:09 -0400 Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| then what else would you expect the Council to do ?

Personally I'd expect the council to block the thing permanently. The
council is, after all, supposed to serve as the last line of defence
against people pushing through bad changes. Council members are
supposed to be able to judge proposals based upon their merits, not the
persistence of those trying to have them pushed through without
following the proper process.

There's no pawning the blame for this one off on arbitrary developers.
Most of them don't have time to keep up with the kind of dirty tricks
being used here.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed

[Stephen P. Becker]

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday 27 July 2006 18:21, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
>> Looking at the meeting log, the
>> council even noted that the concerns had not been addressed
> 
> no, we noted that people claimed they had concerns but when cornered and asked 
> what exactly their concerns were, no more responses were to be had
> 
> people need to bring up their outstanding issues now and get them addressed

Ok, since the first time around apparently wasn't good enough, how about 
this?  This project sucks.  It takes random ebuilds without enough merit 
or demand to even have some team and/or developer within Gentoo pick it 
up, and dumps it to a 
user-supported-yet-completely-official-break-my-gentoo-style tree that 
has to potential to cause all sorts of QA problems.  It flies right in 
the face of those of us that have strived to educate users not to rice 
out their systems with outside-the-tree ebuilds that have not gone 
through some sort of arch team and/or maintainer QA before hitting the 
tree.  There is nothing you or anyone else can say that will make me 
think otherwise, and I think it needs to be killed.  Now.

-Steve
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed

[Andrew Gaffney]

Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> Ok, since the first time around apparently wasn't good enough, how about 
> this?  This project sucks.  It takes random ebuilds without enough merit 
> or demand to even have some team and/or developer within Gentoo pick it 
> up, and dumps it to a 
> user-supported-yet-completely-official-break-my-gentoo-style tree that 
> has to potential to cause all sorts of QA problems.  It flies right in 
> the face of those of us that have strived to educate users not to rice 
> out their systems with outside-the-tree ebuilds that have not gone 
> through some sort of arch team and/or maintainer QA before hitting the 
> tree.  There is nothing you or anyone else can say that will make me 
> think otherwise, and I think it needs to be killed.  Now.

I try to stay out of these types of things, but I have to say that I agree 
completely.

-- 
Andrew Gaffney                            http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
Gentoo Linux Developer                                   Installer Project
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed

[Alex Tarkovsky]

On 7/30/06, Stephen P. Becker <geoman@gentoo.org> wrote:
> There is nothing you or anyone else can say that will make me
> think otherwise,

You won't listen, yet you expect to be listened to. Speaking as a user
and lover of Gentoo I believe you should resign as a developer.

On this list and on IRC, I've watched you disparage Sunrise, its
supporters, and by implication the general user community's desire to
contribute more directly to Gentoo. You've established yourself as
quite an extremist.

Gentoo is a team effort. There's no place in Gentoo for developers who
can't function within a team environment where members must be capable
of rational deliberation and, from time to time, compromise. You are
harming Gentoo far more gravely than your imagined Sunrise QA
problems, because the latter can be managed by the team to within
reasonable tolerances if it becomes an issue, but your willful
ignorance and uncompromising attitude cannot.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1088 bytes --]

On Sunday 30 July 2006 18:07, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Personally I'd expect the council to block the thing permanently.

hard to address any sort of concerns here, so i guess i'll just regurgitate 
the council log to you

it's hard for users to get involved in our development process ... i imagine 
some consider that a feature, but it leaves a large portion of our community 
out in the cold

sunrise is attempting to fill that gap via some controversial methods ... in 
review, we deemed that the many concerns raised were pretty much addressed 
and any more requests for criticism and useful critiques either went 
unanswered or people piped up saying that they were happy with the latest 
state

i (nor anyone else) cannot say whether this venture will succeed, only time 
will prove out the project ... sitting around and clamoring for more openness 
while killing every attempt at it gets us nowhere

we take a risk with this project (like every single other project) ... if 
sunrise turns out to suck and cause problems, then we kill it, no big deal
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 274 bytes --]

On Sunday 30 July 2006 18:47, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> There is nothing you or anyone else can say

well if you're coming forth with such stout resolution of ignoring any one 
else's input, then there's no point in debating the topic with you now is 
there ?
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

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

[Dan Meltzer]

On 7/30/06, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Sunday 30 July 2006 18:07, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Personally I'd expect the council to block the thing permanently.
>
> hard to address any sort of concerns here, so i guess i'll just regurgitate
> the council log to you
>
> it's hard for users to get involved in our development process ... i imagine
> some consider that a feature, but it leaves a large portion of our community
> out in the cold

I do not see why it is considdered hard for users to "get involved".
Users have at least two choices that I can think of right now, and
probably a number that I cannot think of.

1) Users can submit patches/ideas to bugs.g.o at whatever frequency
they desire, contributing to gentoo casually.

2) Users can take the quizzes and become a developer, I do not see why
two quizzes is considdered an insurmountable task, the quizzes are
specifically designed to ensure that people writing ebuilds understand
what ebuilds can contain and what they cannot, I could not imagine a
user wanting to install a package from an ebuild written by someone
that does not know this.

>
> sunrise is attempting to fill that gap via some controversial methods ... in
> review, we deemed that the many concerns raised were pretty much addressed
> and any more requests for criticism and useful critiques either went
> unanswered or people piped up saying that they were happy with the latest
> state
>
> i (nor anyone else) cannot say whether this venture will succeed, only time
> will prove out the project ... sitting around and clamoring for more openness
> while killing every attempt at it gets us nowhere
>
> we take a risk with this project (like every single other project) ... if
> sunrise turns out to suck and cause problems, then we kill it, no big deal
> -mike
>
>
>
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:19:56 -0400 Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| we take a risk with this project (like every single other
| project) ... if sunrise turns out to suck and cause problems, then we
| kill it, no big deal

How many more users and developers will have to be lost before it's
considered to "suck and cause problems"?

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Seemant Kulleen]

On Sun, 2006-07-30 at 22:28 -0400, Dan Meltzer wrote:

> I do not see why it is considdered hard for users to "get involved".
> Users have at least two choices that I can think of right now, and
> probably a number that I cannot think of.

What's wrong with adding a third?  Furthermore, a third where users can
actually get their hands dirty, and one which encourages more eyeballs
on the "code"? 

I mean seriously, this whole discussion has gotten out of hand.  People
actually quit over this issue, which is pretty unfathomable to me.  We
have yet to actually *see* these alleged QA issues that people are
clamouring over each other to escape from -- and sunrise has been about
for a while already.  Surely the nightmare would have started by now?

What, honestly, are people worried about with Sunrise?  Point me to some
actual factual stuff that is verifiable.  Not ad hominem or any sort of
emotional crap -- just the facts, please.

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

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Seemant Kulleen]

On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 03:35 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:19:56 -0400 Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> | we take a risk with this project (like every single other
> | project) ... if sunrise turns out to suck and cause problems, then we
> | kill it, no big deal
> 
> How many more users and developers will have to be lost before it's
> considered to "suck and cause problems"?

I don't recall users having been lost to the Sunrise.  I know of only
one developer who left.  He left in a huff, in an emotional "I'm taking
toys, because I don't like them" way, without actually raising any
issues that he was against, other than a nebulous concern about QA.
Show me at least that concern being concrete and we have a starting
place.



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

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1261 bytes --]

On Sunday 30 July 2006 22:28, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> 1) Users can submit patches/ideas to bugs.g.o at whatever frequency
> they desire, contributing to gentoo casually.

load up your browser and check out how many bugs are assigned 
to 'maintainer-wanted@gentoo.org'

opening a bug, putting together an ebuild/patches/etc..., and then watching it 
sit there and bitrot for weeks, months, and in the extreme case years 
certainly is anything but encouraging

especially considering that by the time a developer gets an interest in the 
posted ebuild, the ebuild/patches/etc... are now bitrotted and need just as 
much work to get them up and working with the latest release

> 2) Users can take the quizzes and become a developer

our developer system does not cater to the "one package per developer" 
organizational style ... as such, would be maintainers need to learn a lot 
more about Gentoo than they may ever actually need

plus the timeframe from saying "hey i'd like to develop" to actually getting 
your own commit access is heftier than many would like to undertake ...

of course this system is by design to try and weed out flakes and make sure 
that people granted access to the whole tree can be pretty well trusted
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

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

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 512 bytes --]

On Sunday 30 July 2006 22:35, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:19:56 -0400 Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
> | we take a risk with this project (like every single other
> | project) ... if sunrise turns out to suck and cause problems, then we
> | kill it, no big deal
>
> How many more users and developers will have to be lost before it's
> considered to "suck and cause problems"?

trying to make everyone happy with every topic that comes up is just never 
going to happen
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

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

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:42:52 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <seemant@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| What, honestly, are people worried about with Sunrise?

Partly, the part where it's run by people who have little clue about
ebuild development or QA, who will be taking code from people who have
little clue about ebuild development or QA and giving it to other
people who have little clue about ebuild development or QA.

Partly, the way it's bypassing the normal herd system and allowing
unqualified developers to push code related to things they don't
understand.

Partly, the way it's being pushed through without proper discussion and
without following the proper processes that're used to reduce the risk
of major screwup.

Sunrise is the wrong solution to a misrepresented problem being run by
the wrong people.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:50:31 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <seemant@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| Show me at least that concern being concrete and we have a
| starting place.

-!- [Users #gentoo-sunrise]
-!- @genstef devon bonsaikitten_ Zamorate eimono|home dev-zero brebs
staskorz @nichoj_work eimono SunriseCIA richiefrich +Peper @CHTEKK
SunriseBot TiCPU shillelagh Juippis 

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Seemant Kulleen]

On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 04:06 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:50:31 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <seemant@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> | Show me at least that concern being concrete and we have a
> | starting place.
> 
> -!- [Users #gentoo-sunrise]
> -!- @genstef devon bonsaikitten_ Zamorate eimono|home dev-zero brebs
> staskorz @nichoj_work eimono SunriseCIA richiefrich +Peper @CHTEKK
> SunriseBot TiCPU shillelagh Juippis 


A user list of a channel doesn't actually say anything.   Please
elaborate.
-- 
Seemant Kulleen <seemant@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Foundation / Gentoo Linux

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Brett I. Holcomb]

I am only a user and have been keeping out of this debate but I feel I need to 
at least express my thoughts.  I have been folllowing the Sunrise thread(s) 
since it started.  I have done a couple of ebuilds a long time ago and 
would love to have been able to contribute to Gentoo but due to time 
constraints - not enough of it <G> - I just can't. 

I have been a longtime Gentoo user and have loved it because A) it had no
rpms (I had to write them for Caldera), B).  It allowed me to configure a 
system for me quickly that ran well without bloat C) It was easy to keep 
updated - no hassling with Yast, yum, apt-get, etc. and D). it was 
dependable - you could download the x86 and know it would work with very few 
issues.

However, I am going to be building a new system from scratch and this sunrise 
mess is causing me to revevaluate my choice of distro.  My concerns - first 
for my systems - are that it is allowing essentially anybody to submit almost 
anything with no QA.  It's a BMG that's offical!  My concern - for users - is 
that since it's officially supported they will expect things to work and when 
they don't  - as they will not - Gentoo's reputation will suffer.

Gentoo provides a means for people to participate on several levels.   They 
can do as I did and do a few ebuild and submit them to bugzilla - if there's 
enough demand then they'll eventually get in portage.  They can also take a 
quiz and do ebuilds on a more official level.  Or they can work to be a 
developer.  All of these paths ensure that we have proper QA and control.

The sunrise people seem bent out of shape that ebuilds sit in bugzilla and 
don't get in the tree.  One comment was that it's discouraging. Well, tough - 
the user who submitted it can get over it and realize that the application 
that is so precious to him is not that wonderful to anyone else.  I did with 
mine - I understood that I did them to accomplish something I needed and I 
put them in bugzilla just in case anyone else had a need but I had no 
expectation of them going into portage.  In fact one of my ebuilds was based 
on another ebuild someone put in portage for the same reason - the author had 
a need, wrote an ebuild and then shared it.  If a user really wants his 
ebuild in portage he'll take the quiz and become a more official part of 
Gentoo - but he will have been tested and checked out.

I administer systems (mainly Windows  but also AIX and LInux - and Linux is my 
main home system!) at my job in IT Operations.  Some of my systems can 
shutdown the business if I mess up.  That's why I do things like run upgrades 
on test systems or use VMware to test out before I turn the changes 
loose.  At home I also need my system to run and work.  I won't be 
downloading Sunrise stuff but I UNDERSTAND the consequences - most users will 
not understand as they figure "It's gentoo so it works".  Look at the 
confusion with ~arch vs arch.  People go with ~arch and then get upset when 
it breaks.   

I know I'm only one user but I'm really disappointed that the Council turned 
sunrise official.  It gives me serious concern a bout Gentoo's reliablity and 
their reputation.

On Sunday July 30 2006 23:06, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:50:31 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <seemant@gentoo.org>
>
> wrote:
> | Show me at least that concern being concrete and we have a
> | starting place.
>
> -!- [Users #gentoo-sunrise]
> -!- @genstef devon bonsaikitten_ Zamorate eimono|home dev-zero brebs
> staskorz @nichoj_work eimono SunriseCIA richiefrich +Peper @CHTEKK
> SunriseBot TiCPU shillelagh Juippis
>
> --
> Ciaran McCreesh
> Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk

-- 

Brett I. Holcomb

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Seemant Kulleen]

OK wait, on your servers, are you actually planning to *use* any of the
ebuilds in Sunrise's overlay?

If not, how is it a concern? I personally don't use any of them, and my
system is running perfectly fine.

Let's not forget that nobody is shoving Sunrise down anyone's throat...



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

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 627 bytes --]

On Sunday 30 July 2006 23:32, Brett I. Holcomb wrote:
> - first for my systems - are that it is allowing essentially anybody to
> submit almost anything with no QA.

no, read the FAQ
http://www.gentoo-sunrise.org/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq#Howareyouensuringthatthereisnob0rken/maliciuscodegettingintotheoverlay

> - for users - is that since it's officially supported they will expect
> things to work and when they don't  - as they will not - Gentoo's
> reputation will suffer.

i wont try and guess at what users will expect ... you can document everything 
and still there will be people who wont read them
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

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

[Brett I. Holcomb]

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.

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.



On Sunday July 30 2006 23:42, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> OK wait, on your servers, are you actually planning to *use* any of the
> ebuilds in Sunrise's overlay?
>
> If not, how is it a concern? I personally don't use any of them, and my
> system is running perfectly fine.
>
> Let's not forget that nobody is shoving Sunrise down anyone's throat...
>
>
>
> --
> Seemant Kulleen <seemant@gentoo.org>
> Gentoo Foundation / Gentoo Linux

-- 

Brett I. Holcomb
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Alex Tarkovsky]

On 7/30/06, Brett I. Holcomb <brettholcomb@bellsouth.net> wrote:
> My concerns - first for my systems - are that it is allowing essentially anybody to
> submit almost anything with no QA.

This "no QA" accusation is a complete myth. QA led by actual Gentoo
developers is indeed in place at Sunrise [1]. Every single
user-authored submission made available in the public overlay was
placed there by existing Gentoo developers who've reviewed and
approved them. When you check out Sunrise using layman for instance,
you are getting what's known as the "reviewed" tree, not the tree that
users commit directly to. If these facts still don't assuage your
concerns then don't use the Sunrise overlay -- it's that simple.

I suspect this myth perpetuates because its supporters haven't
actually bothered to review the Sunrise procedures [2] already in
place and in use. Another source of enlightenment which many, if not
all, of the detractors don't seem to have indulged in is dropping by
#gentoo-sunrise and watching the Sunrise process as it happens in
practice. Please do your homework people, otherwise you're just
spreading FUD.

[1] http://www.gentoo-sunrise.org/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq
[2] http://www.gentoo-sunrise.org/sunrise/wiki/HowToCommit
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Seemant Kulleen]

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

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

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:20:16 -0500 "Alex Tarkovsky"
<alextarkovsky@gmail.com> wrote:
| This "no QA" accusation is a complete myth. QA led by actual Gentoo
| developers is indeed in place at Sunrise [1].

Did you look at *which* actual Gentoo developers are on the list?

Even that aside, if a couple of hundred developers can't handle doing
QA for all those maintainer-wanted ebuilds, what makes you think four
people can?

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Seemant Kulleen]

On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 05:27 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> Did you look at *which* actual Gentoo developers are on the list?

Is this sort of degeneration really necessary?

> Even that aside, if a couple of hundred developers can't handle doing
> QA for all those maintainer-wanted ebuilds, what makes you think four
> people can?

I think, again, people are not looking at Sunrise as a training ground.
It's better to start teaching people QA, and doing so in an active
rather than a passive medium.  Again, I haven't yet seen a reason to
kill Sunrise.

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

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 00:36:36 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <seemant@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 05:27 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > Did you look at *which* actual Gentoo developers are on the list?
| 
| Is this sort of degeneration really necessary?

Considering how one of the major concerns about Sunrise is the QA
aspect, I'd say that the ability of those in charge of its QA is
extremely relevant...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Joshua Jackson]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:20:16 -0500 "Alex Tarkovsky"
> <alextarkovsky@gmail.com> wrote:
> | This "no QA" accusation is a complete myth. QA led by actual Gentoo
> | developers is indeed in place at Sunrise [1].
>
> Did you look at *which* actual Gentoo developers are on the list?
>
> Even that aside, if a couple of hundred developers can't handle doing
> QA for all those maintainer-wanted ebuilds, what makes you think four
> people can?
>
Really now Ciaran, if you have issues with those people. Take it up
with them. You've yet to state a reason why it concerns you. Its no
better then the people who are saying that it'll be a huge QA issue
but they are not elaborating on it. As some are aware and some are
not, the basic job I do for gentoo is a QA one. I help to ensure the
x86 arch tree is hopefully as stable as possible. So if anything this
will affect me directly. I however want to see what the project can
do. If it does end up as a problem then it can be killed off, but
doing so before it has a chance to fly is part of what has been
keeping us from innovating as a distribution. It means we're maturing,
but we are still a community project and as such should be allowed to
fly with possibly wild idea's when it suits us.

As well, we are all human, as you are Ciaran. This means that we make
mistakes. However, what you are also asking is to NOT trust those
people who are qualified to be part of gentoo to be able to do the
work and perform it in a decent way. I will not begin to doubt any of
the people who have the gentoo flag as part of who they are because of
being human. As has been said as well, we learn more from the mistakes
we make then somehow having avoided it without realizing why.

Thirdly, I know one of the issues with one of the leaders of the
project, is the fact that they are not a ebuild developer. I'd like to
have them take the second quiz simply to prove that they have the
knowledge to be trusted to review the ebuilds. Course with the number
that he's seen I'm sure he's helped take care of things that would
make the rest of us go...how did they think that was ever a good idea.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEzY0sSENan+PfizARAu2kAJ488MHWDCtFY8SKetoC1wxFtpPk7wCfW97W
DxJvWeVcd87OukymD/M+Crs=
=kdC9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Seemant Kulleen]

On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 03:53 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> Partly, the part where it's run by people who have little clue about
> ebuild development or QA, who will be taking code from people who have
> little clue about ebuild development or QA and giving it to other
> people who have little clue about ebuild development or QA.

Can you back up the first part? The people running it, you claim, have
little clue about ebuild dev and QA -- can you provide proof of this? It
does, actually, fall on you, since you're making the accusation.

> Partly, the way it's bypassing the normal herd system and allowing
> unqualified developers to push code related to things they don't
> understand.

Where is this code being pushed to, exactly?

> Partly, the way it's being pushed through without proper discussion and
> without following the proper processes that're used to reduce the risk
> of major screwup.

This list has been full of discussion. And before the council meeting,
there were many further calls for discussion and comment.  The sunrise
folks have been actually pretty patient about addressing the same
concerns over and over and over.

> Sunrise is the wrong solution to a misrepresented problem being run by
> the wrong people.

OK, let's start with: what exactly is the problem? What is the correct
way to represent it?  After that please explain how you came to see
sunrise as the wrong solution to that problem.

You've claimed several times that you just try to stick to technical, so
please put a stop to the "look, but it's *them* doing it, how can you
trust those people?" bullshit already.


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

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Alex Tarkovsky]

On 7/30/06, Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:20:16 -0500 "Alex Tarkovsky"
> <alextarkovsky@gmail.com> wrote:
> | This "no QA" accusation is a complete myth. QA led by actual Gentoo
> | developers is indeed in place at Sunrise [1].
>
> Did you look at *which* actual Gentoo developers are on the list?

I'm not certain what you're insinuating here, but yes, I'm a Sunrise
contributor so I work with these Gentoo devs and watch them interact
with everyone daily. They're quite competent, hard-working, friendly
and helpful. Thanks largely in part to their efforts, 4 regular
Sunrise contributors have already decided to increase their
involvement by becoming "trusted committers", and they may very soon
become full-fledged Gentoo developers (the traditional way of course).

> Even that aside, if a couple of hundred developers can't handle doing
> QA for all those maintainer-wanted ebuilds, what makes you think four
> people can?

Sunrise only became functional about a month ago. Give it time.

It's true there are only 4 Gentoo devs *currently* presiding, but they
only oversee the ~150 ebuilds that are currently in Sunrise. As
Sunrise succeeds (and all indications are it's working quite well so
far), more Gentoo devs will no doubt choose to participate. Also note
that it isn't Sunrise's goal to move every single
maintainer-wanted/maintainer-needed ebuild into the overlay, so it's
not fair to judge the project's capabilities against such a lofty
standard.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: Resignation

[Ryan Hill]

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:20:16 -0500 "Alex Tarkovsky"
> | This "no QA" accusation is a complete myth. QA led by actual Gentoo
> | developers is indeed in place at Sunrise [1].

> Did you look at *which* actual Gentoo developers are on the list?

You know, that was a completely unnecessary personal attack.  God forbid anyone 
take the time to attempt something they think may be beneficial to the 
community.  If you in all your elitist wisdom think you can do better then try 
helping out.  If not, then please fuck off.

> Even that aside, if a couple of hundred developers can't handle doing
> QA for all those maintainer-wanted ebuilds, what makes you think four
> people can?

If a couple of hundred developers actually paid any attention whatsoever to 
maintainer-wanted ebuilds then there wouldn't have to be any such project in the 
first place.

--de.

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Resignation

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:22:33 -0600 Ryan Hill <dirtyepic.sk@gmail.com>
wrote:
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:20:16 -0500 "Alex Tarkovsky"
| > | This "no QA" accusation is a complete myth. QA led by actual
| > | Gentoo developers is indeed in place at Sunrise [1].
| 
| > Did you look at *which* actual Gentoo developers are on the list?
| 
| You know, that was a completely unnecessary personal attack.  God
| forbid anyone take the time to attempt something they think may be
| beneficial to the community.  If you in all your elitist wisdom think
| you can do better then try helping out.  If not, then please fuck off.

Good intentions and trying to be helpful don't keep users or
developers. Screwups lose users and developers.

Would you stick a bunch of war evacuees on a plane piloted by Britney
Spears if she said she was doing it because she wanted to be helpful?

| > Even that aside, if a couple of hundred developers can't handle
| > doing QA for all those maintainer-wanted ebuilds, what makes you
| > think four people can?
| 
| If a couple of hundred developers actually paid any attention
| whatsoever to maintainer-wanted ebuilds then there wouldn't have to
| be any such project in the first place.

A couple of hundred developers can barely handle the main tree...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Rumen Yotov]

On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:50:40 -0400
"Brett I. Holcomb" <brettholcomb@bellsouth.net> wrote:
Hi,
Continue with *top-posting* as it is.
Does Gentoo gives more choises to users or not?
With the freedom/choise comes the responsibility (if anything breaks).
Gentoo is known not to be for *everybody* (unless he/she is willing to
learn & quite stubborn to use it).
These ebuilds *are* already in Bugzilla, and for some there're people
interested in maintaining/improving them.
IMHO this is better then an ebuild/s which seats for 2-3 years and is of
*outstanding quality*. The world is in motion not static.
The overall concern (for me) with 'sunrise' & similar is the
availability (in advance) of some *good/understandable* information
about some consequences in using such project/s.
Just a warning no more. All this on main docs page (to be visible).
E.g. some of the current *semi/official* overlays mess with the versions
in the *main tree* so i have to mask/unmask things to do what i want (i
accept this).
Just my point of view, no more.
Rumen
> 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.
> 
> 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.
> 
> 
> 
> On Sunday July 30 2006 23:42, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> > OK wait, on your servers, are you actually planning to *use* any of
> > the ebuilds in Sunrise's overlay?
> >
> > If not, how is it a concern? I personally don't use any of them,
> > and my system is running perfectly fine.
> >
> > Let's not forget that nobody is shoving Sunrise down anyone's
> > throat...
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Seemant Kulleen <seemant@gentoo.org>
> > Gentoo Foundation / Gentoo Linux
> 
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Seemant Kulleen]

On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 06:30 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> Their commit history backs it up all by itself.

Ppint to specifically what, in their respective histories, proves your
case.  This is like pulling teeth.


> | Where is this code being pushed to, exactly?
> 
> Users.

Please note the difference between pulling and pushing.  Pushing implies
that people who don't want sunrise on their systems have to have it and
have to use it.  This is not the case.  So, again, where is this code
being *pushed* to, exactly?


> The correct way to push through a large change is part of the developer
> quiz. There's no excuse for anyone not knowing it.

Was it really a *large change* that they pushed through?  They haven't
altered the way anybody does things.  Any developer or user going about
their normal business does not even have to *think* about sunrise.  Not
that large a change, after all.


> Would you fly in a plane being piloted by Britney Spears?

What do I care what the pilot's name is?  And how is that relevant to
the discussion, when you've yet to actually show why any of the Sunrise
staff is unfit.

Furthermore, there were other questions I asked that you completely
removed from your reply.  Please answer those as well.


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

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 01:38:42 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <seemant@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 06:30 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > Their commit history backs it up all by itself.
| 
| Ppint to specifically what, in their respective histories, proves your
| case.  This is like pulling teeth.

No, the question is what in their respective histories refutes it. And
the answer here is nothing. QA ability isn't something that's assumed,
it's something that has to be demonstrated.

| > | Where is this code being pushed to, exactly?
| > 
| > Users.
| 
| Please note the difference between pulling and pushing.  Pushing
| implies that people who don't want sunrise on their systems have to
| have it and have to use it.  This is not the case.  So, again, where
| is this code being *pushed* to, exactly?

http://www.gentoo.org/news/en/gwn/20060619-newsletter.xml

| > The correct way to push through a large change is part of the
| > developer quiz. There's no excuse for anyone not knowing it.
| 
| Was it really a *large change* that they pushed through?  They haven't
| altered the way anybody does things.  Any developer or user going
| about their normal business does not even have to *think* about
| sunrise.  Not that large a change, after all.

Any developer going about their normal business now has to worry about
an officially approved BMGalike, and whether it's causing the bugs
they're receiving. Any developer going about their normal business now
has to worry about people who know little about the packages they
maintain pushing out content that would ordinarily be covered by their
herd to users via a back route.

| > Would you fly in a plane being piloted by Britney Spears?
| 
| What do I care what the pilot's name is?  

You care whether or not the pilot knows how to fly a plane.

| And how is that relevant to
| the discussion, when you've yet to actually show why any of the
| Sunrise staff is unfit.

To continue with the plane analogy, you don't assume that everyone can
fly a plane until they disprove it by crashing one.

| Furthermore, there were other questions I asked that you completely
| removed from your reply.  Please answer those as well.

They're not relevant to this discussion. We're not discussing what the
right solution is, we're discussing why Sunrise is the wrong solution.
There's a hell of a difference -- as an illustration, most people could
tell you why giving everybody nukes is the wrong way to get peace in
the middle east, but very few could tell you what the right way is...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 499 bytes --]

On Monday 31 July 2006 01:53, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 01:38:42 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <seemant@gentoo.org>
> | Please note the difference between pulling and pushing.  Pushing
> | implies that people who don't want sunrise on their systems have to
> | have it and have to use it.  This is not the case.  So, again, where
> | is this code being *pushed* to, exactly?
>
> http://www.gentoo.org/news/en/gwn/20060619-newsletter.xml

too bad the link doesnt really say anything
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Resignation

[Ryan Hill]

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 23:22:33 -0600 Ryan Hill <dirtyepic.sk@gmail.com>
> | Ciaran McCreesh wrote:

> | > Did you look at *which* actual Gentoo developers are on the list?
> | 
> | You know, that was a completely unnecessary personal attack.  God
> | forbid anyone take the time to attempt something they think may be
> | beneficial to the community.  If you in all your elitist wisdom think
> | you can do better then try helping out.  If not, then please fuck off.
> 
> Good intentions and trying to be helpful don't keep users or
> developers. Screwups lose users and developers.
> 
> Would you stick a bunch of war evacuees on a plane piloted by Britney
> Spears if she said she was doing it because she wanted to be helpful?

Britney Spears being the Sunrise Developers and the evacuees being.. a bunch of 
packages that have no relevance whatsoever since they're copies of ebuilds 
already in bugzilla?  When Britney crashes and burns the ebuilds aren't 
vapourized into a fine red mist.  If Sunrise bombs we're back to the status quo 
with nothing lost.

> | > Even that aside, if a couple of hundred developers can't handle
> | > doing QA for all those maintainer-wanted ebuilds, what makes you
> | > think four people can?
> | 
> | If a couple of hundred developers actually paid any attention
> | whatsoever to maintainer-wanted ebuilds then there wouldn't have to
> | be any such project in the first place.
> 
> A couple of hundred developers can barely handle the main tree...

True.  Some of them want to focus on the nastier bits of it though.  Why should 
we stop them?

Hostility aside, do you have any alternate ideas?


--de.

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Resignation

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 00:10:52 -0600 Ryan Hill <dirtyepic.sk@gmail.com>
wrote:
| Britney Spears being the Sunrise Developers and the evacuees being..
| a bunch of packages that have no relevance whatsoever since they're
| copies of ebuilds already in bugzilla?  When Britney crashes and
| burns the ebuilds aren't vapourized into a fine red mist.  If Sunrise
| bombs we're back to the status quo with nothing lost.

...except for users, developers and reputation.

| Hostility aside, do you have any alternate ideas?

I don't have a perfect solution, no. Unfortunately, knowing why one
thing won't work doesn't automatically let you know what will. Having
said that, any solution that's going to get acceptance from the QA
conscious is pretty much going to have to be based around herd-oriented
overlays rather than a huge general mishmash, and is going to have
to be designed based around requirements rather than around what a few
people can shove through before anyone notices...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Resignation

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 340 bytes --]

On Monday 31 July 2006 02:21, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> I don't have a perfect solution, no. Unfortunately, knowing why one
> thing won't work doesn't automatically let you know what will.

and knowing what does/doesnt work comes a lot from experience, not solely 
making conjectures about how we think everything will work out
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

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

[Seemant Kulleen]

> 
> They're not relevant to this discussion. We're not discussing what the
> right solution is, we're discussing why Sunrise is the wrong solution.
> There's a hell of a difference -- as an illustration, most people could
> tell you why giving everybody nukes is the wrong way to get peace in
> the middle east, but very few could tell you what the right way is...
> 

Yes they are. You obviously didn't read the questions.  I'll paste:
OK, let's start with: what exactly is the problem? What is the correct
way to represent it?  After that please explain how you came to see
sunrise as the wrong solution to that problem.

Note, that nowhere did I aske what the right solution is.  Please be so
kind as to actually *read* what others are saying to you, instead of
presuming.
-- 
Seemant Kulleen <seemant@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Foundation / Gentoo Linux

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 02:37:41 -0400 Seemant Kulleen <seemant@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| > They're not relevant to this discussion. We're not discussing what
| > the right solution is, we're discussing why Sunrise is the wrong
| > solution. There's a hell of a difference -- as an illustration,
| > most people could tell you why giving everybody nukes is the wrong
| > way to get peace in the middle east, but very few could tell you
| > what the right way is...
| > 
| 
| Yes they are. You obviously didn't read the questions.  I'll paste:
| OK, let's start with: what exactly is the problem? What is the correct
| way to represent it?  After that please explain how you came to see
| sunrise as the wrong solution to that problem.
| 
| Note, that nowhere did I aske what the right solution is.  Please be
| so kind as to actually *read* what others are saying to you, instead
| of presuming.

Knowing what the problem is is part of making the solution. The problem
is not that users can't push arbitrary content into a centralised
official repository with no oversight from the herds appropriate for
said content quickly enough. I didn't claim to know exactly what the
real problem is, merely that it's not what's being solved here.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Joshua Jackson]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>
> Knowing what the problem is is part of making the solution. The problem
> is not that users can't push arbitrary content into a centralised
> official repository with no oversight from the herds appropriate for
> said content quickly enough. I didn't claim to know exactly what the
> real problem is, merely that it's not what's being solved here.
>

There is a lot of irony in this entire discussion. We are actually
talking about going against what the heck part of the reason this
project was started. Are we seriously that *can't find the word I'm
looking for* idiotically to not see that we're arguing over not
allowing a user a choice in what they want to do. That we are so high
and mighty that we automatically know what is better for the user then
they themselves know? Who defined us as the ones to make that choice
for someone else, when we are supposedly about allowing choice.

That is the issue at hand at the core of this. Its called choice.
People can choose to use a separate program to download the sunrise
overlays. That separates it entirely from the core tree itself. A
disclaimer for checking out could be added that is prominent that will
warn that these are a service provided to the community from the
community. That those who have gone through the "developer mentorship"
will continue to work on the core of the heart of gentoo, allowing us
to focus and make the product so much better and quicker that you'll
be blindsided with the new improved product. We'll have a rebirth so
to speak.

Bloody, I mean seriously...think about what it is we are arguing over,
and then remember what gentoo is, why you came to it in the first
place. That will probably tell you where it should go.


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEza2pSENan+PfizARAtG2AJ9vvGWRcsRfNtr8oUGgRnK79dcADwCfdP1I
qiTETbjrFc2qBrLYFiHn3xM=
=Oofv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed

[Jan Kundrát]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 398 bytes --]

Alex Tarkovsky wrote:
> Gentoo is a team effort. There's no place in Gentoo for developers who
> can't function within a team environment where members must be capable
> of rational deliberation and, from time to time, compromise.

OTOH this "team collaboration" doesn't mean that we have to agree with
each other, does it?

Cheers,
-jkt

-- 
cd /local/pub && more beer > /dev/mouth


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Resignation

[Simon Stelling]

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Good intentions and trying to be helpful don't keep users or
> developers. Screwups lose users and developers.

It's really funny to hear such a statement from a person who made several great
developers leave the project.

-- 
Kind Regards,

Simon Stelling
Gentoo/AMD64 Developer
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Resignation

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 10:10:45 +0200 Simon Stelling <blubb@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| > Good intentions and trying to be helpful don't keep users or
| > developers. Screwups lose users and developers.
| 
| It's really funny to hear such a statement from a person who made
| several great developers leave the project.

No, what's funny is watching people do nothing when Sunrise really is
making developers leave.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 00:13:45 -0700 Joshua Jackson <tsunam@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| That is the issue at hand at the core of this. Its called choice.

Choice is not an end in itself.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Bryan Ãstergaard]

On Sun, Jul 30, 2006 at 10:50:31PM -0400, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 03:35 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:19:56 -0400 Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
> > wrote:
> > | we take a risk with this project (like every single other
> > | project) ... if sunrise turns out to suck and cause problems, then we
> > | kill it, no big deal
> > 
> > How many more users and developers will have to be lost before it's
> > considered to "suck and cause problems"?
> 
> I don't recall users having been lost to the Sunrise.  I know of only
> one developer who left.  He left in a huff, in an emotional "I'm taking
> toys, because I don't like them" way, without actually raising any
> issues that he was against, other than a nebulous concern about QA.
> Show me at least that concern being concrete and we have a starting
> place.
> 
Left in a huff? I'm sorry but I don't think you fully understand the
reasons for Brix leaving. After Sunrise was suspended by the council
there was a meeting [1] between brix, the sunrise leads (genstef and
jokey), christel (representing user relations), myself and one or two
other people that showed an interest in the meeting (primarily antarus).

At that meeting we tried to figure out what the outstanding issues were
and how they could be solved. The outcome of the meeting was that
sunrise was to stay as an unofficial project until those issues were
solved - I'd like to remind everybody that genstef and jokey agreed on
this. Furthermore Brix was to write up his proposal on how to reach the
goals of sunrise in a more acceptable way (to him and other people
uneasy with the current sunrise project).

Before this could even happen genstef took upon himself to tell the
council that all outstanding problems have been solved although I
haven't seen *any* progress regarding the issues raised on that meeting.

I don't know if genstefs memory is just extremely bad or if he
purposefully misled the council or something entirely different. That's
not really my point either.

*This is my point* - Brix sees sunrise in it's current form as a project
with great potential to harm Gentoo. He agrees with the goals but not
the implementation. And no matter how hard he works at solving the
problems he sees genstef, jokey and the council have mostly ignored him
by unsuspending the project. I certainly don't blame Brix if he sees no
further possibility for correcting those problems and instead chooses to
leave the project.

Regards,
Bryan Østergaard

PS. Sorry genstef about picking at you but I don't know how you managed
to forget everything that was agreed upon on our meeting.

"21:56 <@Koon> Have all the reasonable objections been addressed ?
21:56 <@Koon> because you'll never satisfy those who want it dead anyway
21:56 <+genstef> I hope so. If you can point something more out to me I
would love to hear it" <- our meeting ended up with some concerns that
you even agreed to yourself by keeping sunrise unofficial.

[1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/39764
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Jakub Moc]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2427 bytes --]

Bryan A~stergaard wrote:
> Left in a huff? I'm sorry but I don't think you fully understand the
> reasons for Brix leaving. After Sunrise was suspended by the council
> there was a meeting [1] between brix, the sunrise leads (genstef and
> jokey), christel (representing user relations), myself and one or two
> other people that showed an interest in the meeting (primarily antarus).
> 
> At that meeting we tried to figure out what the outstanding issues were
> and how they could be solved. The outcome of the meeting was that
> sunrise was to stay as an unofficial project until those issues were
> solved - I'd like to remind everybody that genstef and jokey agreed on
> this. Furthermore Brix was to write up his proposal on how to reach the
> goals of sunrise in a more acceptable way (to him and other people
> uneasy with the current sunrise project).
> 
> Before this could even happen genstef took upon himself to tell the
> council that all outstanding problems have been solved although I
> haven't seen *any* progress regarding the issues raised on that meeting.
> 
> I don't know if genstefs memory is just extremely bad or if he
> purposefully misled the council or something entirely different. That's
> not really my point either.
> 
> *This is my point* - Brix sees sunrise in it's current form as a project
> with great potential to harm Gentoo. He agrees with the goals but not
> the implementation. And no matter how hard he works at solving the
> problems he sees genstef, jokey and the council have mostly ignored him
> by unsuspending the project. I certainly don't blame Brix if he sees no
> further possibility for correcting those problems and instead chooses to
> leave the project.

Well, huh??? Looks like you've missed the -dev ML thread altogether, as
did brix (despite it was himself who started it, as Mike has already
pointed out). Brix didn't write any proposal and didn't raise any
specific objections when called for, then he goes to leave b/c the
project has been unsuspended? Sorry, I really fail to see how is this
council's fault (or any Sunrise project member's fault for that matter).


-- 
Best regards,

 Jakub Moc
 mailto:jakub@gentoo.org
 GPG signature:
 http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E
 Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95  B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E

 ... still no signature   ;)


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Bryan Ãstergaard]

On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 11:21:17AM +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
> Bryan A~stergaard wrote:
> Well, huh??? Looks like you've missed the -dev ML thread altogether, as
> did brix (despite it was himself who started it, as Mike has already
> pointed out). Brix didn't write any proposal and didn't raise any
> specific objections when called for, then he goes to leave b/c the
> project has been unsuspended? Sorry, I really fail to see how is this
> council's fault (or any Sunrise project member's fault for that matter).
> 
Issues had been raised again and again and all involved parties had
agreed on several issues still not being fixed. At this point I must say
that I no longer care one way or another about Sunrise - it doesn't seem
to make any difference anyway.

But what I wanted to say was that I certainly understand Brix decision
to leave the project. No matter if you think Sunrise is a great idea or
not, I don't think anybody can say that it's been handled in a proper
way.

That's my opinion anyway and from talking to brix about all this I
believe his biggest reason for leaving have been the way Sunrise have
been forced through despite the many complaints raised (and still not
fixed).

Regards,
Bryan Østergaard
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Jakub Moc]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 922 bytes --]

Bryan A~stergaard wrote:
 > That's my opinion anyway and from talking to brix about all this I
> believe his biggest reason for leaving have been the way Sunrise have
> been forced through despite the many complaints raised (and still not
> fixed).
> 
> Regards,
> Bryan ?stergaard

Well, such as? That "Oh, it's a horrible idea that will become a QA
nightmare, Sunrise needs to die" that I keep hearing over and over again
is not something that can be addressed, sorry - only time will tell.
Beyond that, I can't see any new *specific* objections raised that
actually *could* be addressed. Neither in the previous thread, nor in
the current one.


-- 
Best regards,

 Jakub Moc
 mailto:jakub@gentoo.org
 GPG signature:
 http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E
 Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95  B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E

 ... still no signature   ;)


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed

[Giacomo Cariello]

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> people need to bring up their outstanding issues now and get them
> addressed
Hello all,
I'm currently a Gentoo "power user" and I'm being mentored by kloeri to
become a developer. During this time, I've had the chance to study
accurately the Gentoo developer's handbook and from what I can
understand, respecting the Etiquette policy and being polite to other
developers and users is part of the Quality Assurance of the Gentoo
project. I understand that some matters are particularly "hot" to
discuss, but please help this project be different from other OS
projects that have a high quality code but miss to treat their users and
developers adequately and don't make it confortable to interact with:
it's really part of the user's experience and if we can achieve to keep
this debate from degenerating into a flame, maybe more people will try
to step in and help find a solution. Furthermore, if suspending the
project with a definite timeline to reconsider the next steps may help
to discuss it with more serenity, I encourage the Council to do so.
That said, I'd like to be proactive and share with you my experience
about OpenBSD, another project that has a "tree" of unsupported packages
compiled from source through a series of scripts (ports). In OpenBSD,
ports tree is clearly claimed as unsupported. In my opinion, the
percentage of users that miss to understand that ports do not receive
the same QA as the core system ranges between 5 and 15%. You may also
want to consider that OpenBSD core system is quite limited in terms of
quantity and youth of softwares included, but it's not simply a
collection of packages: instead their target is to assure the quality of
all the code, not just the packaging system. Furthermore, ports are
maintained partly by the OpenBSD team and partly by the developers of
the ported software. This aspect is interesting: if the developer of a
tool is given the possibility to maintain their port or packaging
scripts for various Operating Systems, there's a chance that they will
implement them with a good quality, because they know the packaged
software certainly better than an external developer from the OS team:
most people like keeping their car polished, but not in working for a
car wash. After all, most ebuilds under Gentoo are not going much
further the statement that "it works fine". Obviously, this a two-edge
blade: unlimited free commit to any quantity and quality of ebuilds is
given, when the unofficial overlay grows larger, its quality will
evenually decrease to an unacceptable level. So maybe a good compromise
could be to limit access of users to one specific software or series of
softwares, giving priority to those who actually develop the software
they want to package under Gentoo. This way, we would be able to improve
sinergy between herds and software developers and maybe lift some work
to external sources while avoiding the risk of malicious code injected
into widely-used packages. In OpenBSD, external developers must show
their diligence and knowledge of ports system, before they're given CVS
access to their port.

While I'm not upholding the idea that we should conform to OpenBSD in
its kind of management (Actually, I'm not expert enough to have a solid
opinion on wether Sunrise project should be aborted or continued), the
above hints may be useful to this discussion, in order to understand
what could happen or not happen in the future if we go through a certain
way and they may be useful to formulate new ideas or proposals.

Last, IMHO we should avoid the word "support" regarding Sunrise, because
this word is ambiguous, since it has two different meanings:
a) Yes, we support it, meaning that we endorse it and spend some of our
resources to make it work.
b) No, we don't support it, since we don't give any warranty regarding
its quality.

Sincerely,

Giacomo 'jwk' Cariello
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Roy Bamford]

On 2006.07.31 03:35, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Jul 2006 22:19:56 -0400 Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> | we take a risk with this project (like every single other
> | project) ... if sunrise turns out to suck and cause problems, then
> we
> | kill it, no big deal
> 
> How many more users and developers will have to be lost before it's
> considered to "suck and cause problems"?
> 
> --
> Ciaran McCreesh
> Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk
> 
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
> 
> 
> 
So take a sunrise reviewed ebuild and document it showing examples of  
your concerns.

Regards,

Roy Bamford

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise resumed

[Roy Bamford]

On 2006.07.31 03:00, Alex Tarkovsky wrote:
> On 7/30/06, Stephen P. Becker <geoman@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> There is nothing you or anyone else can say that will make me
>> think otherwise,
> 
> You won't listen, yet you expect to be listened to. Speaking as a  
> user and lover of Gentoo I believe you should resign as a developer.
> 
[snip]
>-- 
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 
> 

Gentoo is a microcosm of the real world, there are closed minds and  
predudices everywhere - why should the Gentoo dev community be any  
different?

Regards,

Roy Bamford

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Resignation

[Georgi Georgiev]

maillog: 31/07/2006-09:21:51(+0100): Ciaran McCreesh types
> 
> No, what's funny is watching people do nothing when Sunrise really is
> making developers leave.

Did I miss someone's resignation, or was the plural "developers" an
exaggeration.

-- 
\    Georgi Georgiev   \  Amy: "What about Umbrielle?" Fry: "Well,   \
/     chutz@gg3.net    /  it turned out I loved her, but I wasn't in /
\  http://www.gg3.net/ \  love with her." Amy: "Trouble in bed."     \
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Christian Andreetta]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> 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.

It has just to be put clear that in this case "official" doesn't mean
"solid", "right", "tested by our best QA", but simply "preferred". That
is, I think we're not speaking of "official", but "_basically_ revised"
and "encouraged".

Many users (and I'm both a dev *and* a user) just could do much for
Gentoo, but when you're interested in a niche sector package, you *don't
have other choices* but

1) an endless wait for an open bug
2) becoming dev for the good of all :-)
3) just use your personal overlay, without sharing the results of your
efforts. If the bug in 1) is still open, why updating it with your
latest patches/revision bumps?

Statistically you end up to 3). We just need something to reduce this
"statistically".

> 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'm just adding another good point to sunrise (or whatever will be a
revised "preferred centralized repo of packages not officially
supported"): you have another way to benefit of retired devs who just
don't have the time to be responsible for the bugs of a package in an
arch they don't know, but have the interest and the competence to add
packages to an unofficial overlay.

I'll be soon one of those devs: maybe some of the packages I maintain
will finish as "maintainer-wanted". And, in this case, they could
eventually end up in the sunrise overlay: a way for the users to help users.


Just my 2 euro c
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFEzeL5xrlkonpN2woRAgR6AKCZ95pvY5BCaaHfkDeU0bXhsn3/ngCfWCTa
QTpQ3b2LvCnENAWdTSZx5Ng=
=GTM7
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Giacomo Cariello]

Roy Bamford wrote:
> Sunrise attempts to provide the next part of the school system down.
A school system should have a well defined syllabus, explicit
educational targets and an objective evaluation system. If Gentoo is
going to run a Gentoo School with courses for developers, that sounds
cool (and may relieve some burden from the developers mentors). Probably
its objectors just want the project to formalize its methods before
official launch.

In regard to the "rule of thumb" you suggest to verify average quality,
I wouldn't consider a reliable way to assess quality. I suppose that
part of responsibility of Gentoo towards their users consist in "using
caution" in their choices. Caution suggest that you cannot suppose the
long-term effects by measuring the current, limited, 150-ebuilds version
of this project. Also, it's better to debate this path now, rather than
wait until we realize Gentoo cannot handle at least minimal safety of a
100000-ebuilds user-contributed overlay used by hundreds/thousands of
people and throw it in the dustbin with a "we said that if it doesn't
work, we kill it" quote. It would be a lack of respect towards the
efforts of users that contributed to it.

- Giacomo 'jwk' Cariello


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Roy Bamford]

On 2006.07.31 12:01, Giacomo Cariello wrote:
> Roy Bamford wrote:
> > Sunrise attempts to provide the next part of the school system  
> down. A school system should have a well defined syllabus, explicit
> educational targets and an objective evaluation system. If Gentoo is
> going to run a Gentoo School with courses for developers, that sounds
> cool (and may relieve some burden from the developers mentors).

Agreed.

> Probably its objectors just want the project to formalize its methods  
> before official launch.

Possibly.

> 
> In regard to the "rule of thumb" you suggest to verify average
> quality,
> I wouldn't consider a reliable way to assess quality. I suppose that
> part of responsibility of Gentoo towards their users consist in  
> "using caution" in their choices. Caution suggest that you cannot  
> suppose the long-term effects by measuring the current, limited,  
> 150-ebuilds version of this project.

You can only examine now, what exists now. The long term effects can be  
assessed by repeated examinations, much like holders of ISO 9000 (a  
quality standard) undergo to retain their accreditation.
Going off on a wild tangent for a moment perhaps sunrise and other  
overlays could be accredited by Gentoo using such a system of regular  
and surprise checks.

> Also, it's better to debate this path now, rather
> than wait until we realize Gentoo cannot handle at least minimal  
> safety of a 100000-ebuilds user-contributed overlay used by  
> hundreds/thousands of people and throw it in the dustbin with a "we  
> said that if it doesn't work, we kill it" quote.
This in not a realistic claim - look at the way the official portage  
tree has grown with time and that changes made to cope with that  
growth. Your statement implies that sunrise starts out badly, gets  
worse but nobody notices for a long time. That's simply not realistic.
Sunrise will evolve - like any other OSS project.

I would expect sunrise to spawn both devs and ebuilds and to see the  
more popular ebuilds moved into the official tree as the dev population  
can cope. That's not much different from the present process, where  
ebuilds are in b.g.o. However b.g.o doesn't interactively encourage  
would be devs.

> It would be a lack of respect towards the efforts of users that  
> contributed to it.
Yes it would and it won't happen.

> 
> - Giacomo 'jwk' Cariello
> 
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 

Regards,

Roy Bamford

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Bryan Ãstergaard]

On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 01:01:20PM +0200, Christian Andreetta wrote:
> 
> Many users (and I'm both a dev *and* a user) just could do much for
> Gentoo, but when you're interested in a niche sector package, you *don't
> have other choices* but
> 
> 1) an endless wait for an open bug
> 2) becoming dev for the good of all :-)
> 3) just use your personal overlay, without sharing the results of your
> efforts. If the bug in 1) is still open, why updating it with your
> latest patches/revision bumps?
4) Bash devs to add your ebuild
5) Use proxy maintaining (as been suggested several times)

Proxy maintaining already happens but some people claims not enough
users and devs use this. Personally I'd love to see proxy maintaining
advertised which would probably help proxy maintaining take off and
offer a way for users to (fairly easy) contribute to the tree and be
sure their ebuilds ends up in the tree.

> 
> Statistically you end up to 3). We just need something to reduce this
> "statistically".
> 
See above. I'd love for more users to end up at 5).

Regards,
Bryan Østergaard
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Denis Dupeyron]

On 7/31/06, Joshua Jackson <tsunam@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Thirdly, I know one of the issues with one of the leaders of the
> project, is the fact that they are not a ebuild developer. I'd like to
> have them take the second quiz simply to prove that they have the
> knowledge to be trusted to review the ebuilds. Course with the number
> that he's seen I'm sure he's helped take care of things that would
> make the rest of us go...how did they think that was ever a good idea.

What if a well respected ebuild developper that supports the project
volunteered to join it ? It could add some credibility to it and
reduce the number of reasons that some people could shout about. I'm
concerned that those against sunrise will claim that passing the end
quizz doesn't give the sunrise leaders any more experience and
credibility overnight.

Denis.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Mike Kelly]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3899 bytes --]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 00:13:45 -0700
Joshua Jackson <tsunam@gentoo.org> wrote:

> There is a lot of irony in this entire discussion. We are actually
> talking about going against what the heck part of the reason this
> project was started. Are we seriously that *can't find the word I'm
> looking for* idiotically to not see that we're arguing over not
> allowing a user a choice in what they want to do. That we are so high
> and mighty that we automatically know what is better for the user then
> they themselves know? Who defined us as the ones to make that choice
> for someone else, when we are supposedly about allowing choice.
> 
> That is the issue at hand at the core of this. Its called choice.
> People can choose to use a separate program to download the sunrise
> overlays. That separates it entirely from the core tree itself. A
> disclaimer for checking out could be added that is prominent that will
> warn that these are a service provided to the community from the
> community. That those who have gone through the "developer mentorship"
> will continue to work on the core of the heart of gentoo, allowing us
> to focus and make the product so much better and quicker that you'll
> be blindsided with the new improved product. We'll have a rebirth so
> to speak.
> 
> Bloody, I mean seriously...think about what it is we are arguing over,
> and then remember what gentoo is, why you came to it in the first
> place. That will probably tell you where it should go.

Speaking as a user of Gentoo in general, and as a small contributor to
Sunrise, I don't think your argument about "choice" really is relevant.
Since Gentoo is licensed under the GPL-2, end users can always choose
to do whatever the heck they want. They can make their own overlays,
patch packages to no tomorrow, and use whatever packages they wish on
their system.

As I understand it, the real goal is to let users get a taste of what
ebuild development is supposed to be like, and to give them a lot of
guidance and a chance to get their draft work peer reviewed. This is
something they could always /choose/ to do, either by visiting the
#gentoo-dev-help channel on freenode, posting a new ebuild on bugzilla,
the forums, etc. The Sunrise project is just trying to focus entirely
on ebuilds, while most of the above have other primary focuses.

I /think/ the issues some folks are taking with the project are:

 * It's dangerous to have this sort of thing "officially" affiliated
   with Gentoo because it has the potential to cause unforeseen
   breakage. For example, an ebuild in the tree may have a flag
   for ./configure which wasn't explicitly disabled but which will now
   auto-set itself on when a certain package from Sunrise was
   installed. This /could/ cause some breakage which is very difficult
   for someone trying to help a user submitting a bug to recreate, and
   create some wasted time and general frustration on both sides. In
   general, many wish to change the image of Gentoo being the "ricer"
   OS, and in some ways this project has that sort of air about it.

 * The design of the project, people involved, whatever, isn't
   conducive to it achieving its desired goal (helping train users in
   proper ebuild development). I think the point about not having
   involvement from the relevant herds or arch teams is related to this
   as well.I don't have enough experience to judge this point at all. 

Speaking just as myself, I think that, if I were to choose to use some
ebuild from Sunrise other than the one I wrote myself, I would be
careful and wouldn't scream to hard if something broke. I don't know
what others would do. I think that the project does have some merit and
seeks to achieve a worthy goal. I don't know, however, if it is the
best option available, or the best execution.

-- 
Mike Kelly

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 15:08:12 +0200 "Denis Dupeyron"
<calchan@gentoo.org> wrote:
| What if a well respected ebuild developper that supports the project
| volunteered to join it ?

Get a half dozen and I suspect a lot of the concern will be reduced
substantially...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Doug Goldstein]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1533 bytes --]

Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> To my former fellow Gentoo developers and users,
> 
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 11:58:09PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
>> To my fellow Gentoo developers and users,
>>
>> In last weeks council meeting [1] it was decided that the Sunrise project is
>> no longer suspended. I can give a short overview of the current status of
>> the overlay:
> 
> Seeing this I'd like to resign as a Gentoo developer.
> 
> Thank you to all the developers and users who have made the last two
> years a fun period of my life in OSS. You all know who you are. I'll
> miss you guys and gals.
> 
> I wish the remaining developers good luck with keeping Gentoo Linux
> among the top GNU/Linux distributions out there.
> 
> I can be reached at henrik@brixandersen.dk should anybody have any
> questions to the ebuilds, I used to maintain. Sorry about dumping the
> ebuilds on the people who kindly took over when I announced my present
> hiatus - but I'm sure you'll do a good job at maintaining them.
> 
> I have an unfinished draft for a pcmcia-cs to pcmciautils migration
> howto sitting in my home dir - I'd appreciate if someone would step
> up and finish it.
> 
> So long and thank you for all the fish,
> Brix

Brixy!! You can't leave. Who else will I ramble to on IRC after coming
back from the bars? Who else will fix my wireless adapter?

I feel so cold and alone!!

But seriously, you'll be missed. :(

-- 
Doug Goldstein <cardoe@gentoo.org>
http://dev.gentoo.org/~cardoe/


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Henrik Brix Andersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 634 bytes --]

On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 08:53:00PM -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Brixy!! You can't leave. Who else will I ramble to on IRC after coming
> back from the bars? Who else will fix my wireless adapter?

You can still ramble to me on IRC - it's not like I'm dropping off the
face of the Earth. As for your wireless adapter... if you want me to
help with that you'd have to change your operating system ;)

> I feel so cold and alone!!

Got dumped again, eh? ;)

> But seriously, you'll be missed. :(

Thank you.

Regards,
Brix
-- 
Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 211 bytes --]

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

[Carsten Lohrke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 807 bytes --]

On Monday 31 July 2006 07:05, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> OK, let's start with: what exactly is the problem?

Please reread my replies in the first sunrise thread. Points are: no security, 
issues with eclass changes which will result in bug spam, the fact that 
sunrise is a bunch of arbitrary packages, instead close related ones managed 
by one team, that does exactly maintain relevant packages. These issues are 
fundamental, pointed out multiple times. You can't believe how ridiculous 
Mike's question in the other thread, if there were any remaining issues, 
sound to me and obviously others.

From your other email:
>People actually quit over this issue, which is pretty unfathomable to me.
Um, thought about it as well. One of the reasons I'm less active the last 
weeks.


Carsten

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

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

[Carsten Lohrke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1927 bytes --]

On Monday 31 July 2006 04:52, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Sunday 30 July 2006 22:28, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> > 1) Users can submit patches/ideas to bugs.g.o at whatever frequency
> > they desire, contributing to gentoo casually.
>
> load up your browser and check out how many bugs are assigned
> to 'maintainer-wanted@gentoo.org'

This isn't the problem. We'll never can maintain all this stuff - given the 
number of people we're. We need more devs - just to clean up the current tree 
and maintain it properly at it's current size one- or two hundred (having 
fluctuation in mind) more guys wouldn't harm. The problem is more that we 
have devs who constantly add (arbitrary) stuff to the tree, instead cleaning 
out and caring for unmaintained stuff, before adding something new.

> opening a bug, putting together an ebuild/patches/etc..., and then watching
> it sit there and bitrot for weeks, months, and in the extreme case years
> certainly is anything but encouraging
>
> especially considering that by the time a developer gets an interest in the
> posted ebuild, the ebuild/patches/etc... are now bitrotted and need just as
> much work to get them up and working with the latest release

This is still a community distro. That means we need people who want to become 
become devs to maintain more. That simple. Surise won't help in this regard. 
It's just an extended repository for lazy people, who don't care for security 
with the side effect of increased bug spam.

> plus the timeframe from saying "hey i'd like to develop" to actually
> getting your own commit access is heftier than many would like to undertake
> ...

Is it? I got new devs on board within a few weeks. It could always be better, 
but I think that's reasonable. Do you have numbers? Has devrel a statistic? 
In my experience it's more that a lot of people moan, but don't want to 
become active.


Carsten

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

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

[Alec Warner]

Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Monday 31 July 2006 07:05, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
>> OK, let's start with: what exactly is the problem?
> 
> Please reread my replies in the first sunrise thread. Points are: no security, 
> issues with eclass changes which will result in bug spam, the fact that 
eclass changes?  You can't even commit eclasses to it...

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Carsten Lohrke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1192 bytes --]

On Monday 31 July 2006 13:01, Christian Andreetta wrote:
> Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> > 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.
>
> It has just to be put clear that in this case "official" doesn't mean
> "solid", "right", "tested by our best QA", but simply "preferred". That
> is, I think we're not speaking of "official", but "_basically_ revised"
> and "encouraged".

And that's why it has been announced as the best since sliced bred - urging 
all users to give it a try, but with the option to point with the finger on 
them, laughing "Ha, ha, you should have known dumb nuts.", later. Brett is 
absolutely right with his previous emails.


Carsten

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

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

[Carsten Lohrke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 314 bytes --]

On Thursday 01 January 1970 01:00, Alec Warner wrote:
> eclass changes?  You can't even commit eclasses to it...

Eclass changes in the main tree, including all relevant ebuilds updated, but 
breaking the ebuilds in the Surise overlay, having whining users or borked 
systems in the worst case.


Carsten

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

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

[Brian Harring]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2659 bytes --]

On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 02:24:17AM +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> On Monday 31 July 2006 07:05, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> > OK, let's start with: what exactly is the problem?
> 1) Please reread my replies in the first sunrise thread. Points are:
1) no security, 

Suggest you read their responses, and look into some of their material 
(in particular their faq).

Two levels.

One, holding area (essentially).
Second level (what users get), is the reviewed branch.

So... if you're arguing people can stick malicious shit into the first 
level, yes, they could.

I could also stick malicious code into bugzilla.  If you're dumb 
enough to run it without checking it, your own fault (both cases).

If you're arguing that malicious code gets stuck into reviewed... when 
I was a dev, I could have very easily done the same thing.

Comes down to trust that they know what they're doing for the second 
level- again, same situation for the gentoo-x86.

And... just cause I'm mildly sick of this bullshit, I'll head off 
the retort of "but people with +w for gentoo-x86 have been passed 
through the developer process, screening the malicious".  Ayone 
determined can punch through it without issue- *both* gentoo-x86 and 
sunrise.


> 2) issues with eclass changes which will result in bug spam

You're not supposed to change the exposed api of eclasses in the tree 
(something y'all do violate I might add, which is a seperate QA 
matter).  Same issue applies to the 'official' overlays offered by 
devs also, and to the tree in general.

It's a reaching statement, bluntly.  Using such an arguement has the 
side affect of stating that no overlays should ever exist, because 
they suffer the same potentials.

Which obviously is a bit of BS.


> 3) the fact that sunrise is a bunch of arbitrary packages, instead close related ones managed 
> by one team, that does exactly maintain relevant packages.

What the hell do you think the tree is?  It's a bunch of arbitrary 
packages maintained loosely by subgroups of people; you're stating 
that sunrise is too loose yet gentoo-x86 is fundamentally no 
different.

Sunrise is pretty much the same damn thing.


> These issues are 
> fundamental, pointed out multiple times. You can't believe how ridiculous 
> Mike's question in the other thread, if there were any remaining issues, 
> sound to me and obviously others.

Frankly, your points are assine/fud here.  If you're going to bitch 
about flaws inherent in the work _you_ also do, kindly at least state 
it's universal rather then pawning it off as a sunrise specific 
failing.

~harring

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Richard Fish]

On 8/1/06, Carsten Lohrke <carlo@gentoo.org> wrote:
> And that's why it has been announced as the best since sliced bred - urging
> all users to give it a try, but with the option to point with the finger on
> them, laughing "Ha, ha, you should have known dumb nuts.", later. Brett is
> absolutely right with his previous emails.

Nothing that I have read about sunrise, either in GWN, their project
pages, or the FAQ, has given me the impression that they are "urging
all users to give it a try".  There is certainly some advertising
about it, as would be appropriate for any new Gentoo project.  But
nothing that I would say gives the slightest hint of "pushiness".

-Richard
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Thierry Carrez]

Brian Harring wrote:

> What the hell do you think the tree is?  It's a bunch of arbitrary 
> packages maintained loosely by subgroups of people; you're stating 
> that sunrise is too loose yet gentoo-x86 is fundamentally no 
> different.
> 
> Sunrise is pretty much the same damn thing.

Or maybe he means the "Gentoo developers" are an elite group of flawless
people, blessed by the mighty ebuild quizz ? That elitism would in the
end kill us, and I thank the Sunrise project for opening up Gentoo a
little more to the community. We may have to lose a few elitist fellows
in the process, but I still stand by the Council decision that it was
the right thing to do.

I just can't see how an ebuild directly committed without peer review to
the tree is necessary better than an ebuild contributed by a power user
and peer-reviewed by a Gentoo developer, ending up in a repository you
have to choose to use...

-- 
Koon
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Wed, 02 Aug 2006 11:21:38 +0200 Thierry Carrez <koon@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| Or maybe he means the "Gentoo developers" are an elite group of
| flawless people, blessed by the mighty ebuild quizz ? That elitism
| would in the end kill us, and I thank the Sunrise project for opening
| up Gentoo a little more to the community. We may have to lose a few
| elitist fellows in the process, but I still stand by the Council
| decision that it was the right thing to do.

The alternative to elitism is mediocrity. Would you like Gentoo to be a
mediocre distribution?

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Denis Dupeyron]

On 8/2/06, Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> The alternative to elitism is mediocrity. Would you like Gentoo to be a
> mediocre distribution?

The real world isn't binary. So there's a whole range of alternatives
between elitism and mediocrity.

Denis.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Wed, 2 Aug 2006 11:41:10 +0200 "Denis Dupeyron" <calchan@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| On 8/2/06, Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
| > The alternative to elitism is mediocrity. Would you like Gentoo to
| > be a mediocre distribution?
| 
| The real world isn't binary. So there's a whole range of alternatives
| between elitism and mediocrity.

But the quality of an overall product is no greater than the quality of
its worst part...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Alex Tarkovsky]

On 8/2/06, Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> The alternative to elitism is mediocrity. Would you like Gentoo to be a
> mediocre distribution?

Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard...

http://arcanux.org/scarecrow.png

Cheers.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Roy Bamford]

On 2006.08.02 10:51, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Aug 2006 11:41:10 +0200 "Denis Dupeyron"
> <calchan@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> | On 8/2/06, Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
> | > The alternative to elitism is mediocrity. Would you like Gentoo to
> | > be a mediocre distribution?
> |
> | The real world isn't binary. So there's a whole range of
> alternatives
> | between elitism and mediocrity.

The alternative to elitism is extinction, in a binary world.

> 
> But the quality of an overall product is no greater than the quality
> of its worst part...

So the quality of British Rail trains is no better than the sandwiches  
they serve ?
At least the sandwiches are not safety involved, nor made as if they  
were.

> 
> --
> Ciaran McCreesh
> Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk
> 
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Regards,

Roy Bamford

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Jochen Maes]

> On 8/2/06, Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> The alternative to elitism is mediocrity. Would you like Gentoo to be a
>> mediocre distribution?
>
> Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard...
>
> http://arcanux.org/scarecrow.png
>
but this time he is right, am i gl
> Cheers.
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Jochen Maes]

> On 8/2/06, Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>> The alternative to elitism is mediocrity. Would you like Gentoo to be a
>> mediocre distribution?
>
> Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard...
>
> http://arcanux.org/scarecrow.png
but he has a valid point. this is not a step forward!
>
> Cheers.
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Stephen P. Becker]

> Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard...
> 
> http://arcanux.org/scarecrow.png

Ha ha ha! Oh gosh that's funny! That's really funny! Do you photoshop 
your own material? Do you? Because that is so fresh. Ciaranm is like a 
scarecrow. You know, I've, I've never heard anyone make that joke 
before. Hmm. You're the first. I've never heard anyone reference, 
reference that outside of irc before. Because that's what everyone who 
disagrees with him says right? Isn't it? He is a scarecrow. And, and yet 
you've taken that and posted it in this discussion to insult him in this 
everyday situation. God what a clever, smart person you must be, to come 
up with a joke like that all by yourself. That's so fresh too. Any, any 
George W. Bush jokes you want to throw out too as long as we're hitting 
these phenomena at the height of their popularity? God you're so funny!
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Chris Bainbridge]

On 02/08/06, Carsten Lohrke <carlo@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Monday 31 July 2006 04:52, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Sunday 30 July 2006 22:28, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> > > 1) Users can submit patches/ideas to bugs.g.o at whatever frequency
> > > they desire, contributing to gentoo casually.
> >
> > load up your browser and check out how many bugs are assigned
> > to 'maintainer-wanted@gentoo.org'
>
> This isn't the problem. We'll never can maintain all this stuff - given the
> number of people we're. We need more devs - just to clean up the current tree
> and maintain it properly at it's current size one- or two hundred (having
> fluctuation in mind) more guys wouldn't harm. The problem is more that we
> have devs who constantly add (arbitrary) stuff to the tree, instead cleaning
> out and caring for unmaintained stuff, before adding something new.

The real problem which you're hinting at is that developer interest is
transitory. Nobody thinks "Hell, I'll just add loads of odd crap to
the tree and then ignore it", it just happens that people suddenly
become interested in some software (maybe for a project, or client..),
use it for a while, and then stop using it. Now they are still listed
as a maintainer but don't bother version bumping or bug fixing, since
they no longer have an interest in the package. Despite this, people
keep posting patches to bugzilla, which are ignored (they are lots of
user bug reports with simple patch fixes attached that never make it
into the tree). The "maintainer for ever" model is broken; hopefully
the community maintainer model that Sunrise is encouraging will prove
better over time.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1331 bytes --]

On Monday 31 July 2006 04:28, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> I do not see why it is considdered hard for users to "get involved".
> Users have at least two choices that I can think of right now, and
> probably a number that I cannot think of.
>
> 1) Users can submit patches/ideas to bugs.g.o at whatever frequency
> they desire, contributing to gentoo casually.

And the patch hanging in bugzilla forever because no-one wants to maintain it. 
Sunrise could help here, by accepting properly written ebuilds that do 
however not get maintenance. Sunrise should not really be about replacing 
current ebuilds, but offering some support for those packages that are useful 
for some, but that do not have enough usage that a developer wants to put it 
into the tree.

>
> 2) Users can take the quizzes and become a developer, I do not see why
> two quizzes is considdered an insurmountable task, the quizzes are
> specifically designed to ensure that people writing ebuilds understand
> what ebuilds can contain and what they cannot, I could not imagine a
> user wanting to install a package from an ebuild written by someone
> that does not know this.

They first need to be invited to start the whole process.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 200 bytes --]

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

[Roy Marples]

On Wednesday 02 August 2006 15:27, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> On Monday 31 July 2006 04:28, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> > 1) Users can submit patches/ideas to bugs.g.o at whatever frequency
> > they desire, contributing to gentoo casually.
>
> And the patch hanging in bugzilla forever because no-one wants to maintain
> it. Sunrise could help here, by accepting properly written ebuilds that do
> however not get maintenance.

How does that help?

User goes to bugzilla
or
User goes to sunrise

User still has to go somewhere outside of the tree.

Thanks

-- 
Roy Marples <uberlord@gentoo.org>
Gentoo/Linux Developer (baselayout, networking)
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 667 bytes --]

On Monday 31 July 2006 08:47, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Knowing what the problem is is part of making the solution. The problem
> is not that users can't push arbitrary content into a centralised
> official repository with no oversight from the herds appropriate for
> said content quickly enough. I didn't claim to know exactly what the
> real problem is, merely that it's not what's being solved here.
>
Herds do not have turfs. They specialise in particular areas but that doesn't 
mean that all packages in that area have to fall under the herd.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 200 bytes --]

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

[Alec Warner]

Alex Tarkovsky wrote:
> On 8/2/06, Stephen P. Becker <geoman@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> > Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard...
>> >
>> > http://arcanux.org/scarecrow.png
>>
>> Ha ha ha! Oh gosh that's funny! That's really funny! Do you photoshop
>> your own material? Do you? Because that is so fresh. Ciaranm is like a
>> scarecrow. You know, I've, I've never heard anyone make that joke
>> before. Hmm. You're the first. I've never heard anyone reference,
>> reference that outside of irc before. Because that's what everyone who
>> disagrees with him says right? Isn't it? He is a scarecrow. And, and yet
>> you've taken that and posted it in this discussion to insult him in this
>> everyday situation. God what a clever, smart person you must be, to come
>> up with a joke like that all by yourself. That's so fresh too. Any, any
>> George W. Bush jokes you want to throw out too as long as we're hitting
>> these phenomena at the height of their popularity? God you're so funny!
> 
> There's a stark line between satire (my post) and invective (your
> tirade). That you don't seem aware of its existence and decided to
> exhibit this ignorance publicly is yet another reason I believe you
> should retire as a Gentoo developer. Please, you're hurting Gentoo.

I'd prefer you both take your retorts offlist, as neither are on topic here.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Carsten Lohrke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 775 bytes --]

On Wednesday 02 August 2006 05:50, Richard Fish wrote:
> Nothing that I have read about sunrise, either in GWN, their project
> pages, or the FAQ, has given me the impression that they are "urging
> all users to give it a try".  There is certainly some advertising
> about it, as would be appropriate for any new Gentoo project.  But
> nothing that I would say gives the slightest hint of "pushiness".

Well, as long as there's no big fat warning that there's not support, no 
security team backing it up - and that the overlay is not meant for general 
consumption, it's very problematic. On the contrary, it's written down that 
the overlay is meant to make a wide range of ebuilds easily available - 
without any measures to secure its consumers.


Carsten

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

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

[Carsten Lohrke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2720 bytes --]

First I'd like to state that I do offer my opinion. You don't have to like it, 
but disqualifying it as flaming, while exactly doing this yourself, 
disqualifies you. I'd appreciate, if you would try to have a controversial 
discussion, without starting to loose your manners.


On Wednesday 02 August 2006 03:39, Brian Harring wrote:
> 1) no security,
>
> Suggest you read their responses, and look into some of their material
> (in particular their faq).
>
> Two levels.
>
> One, holding area (essentially).
> Second level (what users get), is the reviewed branch.
>
> So... if you're arguing people can stick malicious shit into the first
> level, yes, they could.
> [...] 

You haven't read what I wrote, as I asked you to do. My point isn't that 
people add malicious ebuilds to the overlay. There're more subtle methods 
anyway, given that the tree still isn't signed. I wrote about vulnerablities 
in the upstream software, neither having a security team backing them up nor 
GLSA's to be written.


> And... just cause I'm mildly sick of this bullshit,

And I'm sick of people, who miss the point.


> > 2) issues with eclass changes which will result in bug spam
>
> You're not supposed to change the exposed api of eclasses in the tree
> (something y'all do violate I might add, which is a seperate QA
> matter).  Same issue applies to the 'official' overlays offered by
> devs also, and to the tree in general.

We can change eclasses all the time, assuming all relevant ebuilds in the tree 
get adjusted - just that no one cares for any overlay.

> It's a reaching statement, bluntly.  Using such an arguement has the
> side affect of stating that no overlays should ever exist, because
> they suffer the same potentials.

Local overlays are fine as the user exactly knows what he does in his private 
overlay (and hopefully follows eclass changes), development overlays are fine 
(assuming the group of people controls the releavant overlays as well), 
overlays like Sunrise are problematic, not to use such anal words as you do.

> > 3) the fact that sunrise is a bunch of arbitrary packages, instead close
> > related ones managed by one team, that does exactly maintain relevant
> > packages.
>
> What the hell do you think the tree is?  It's a bunch of arbitrary
> packages maintained loosely by subgroups of people; you're stating
> that sunrise is too loose yet gentoo-x86 is fundamentally no
> different.
>
> Sunrise is pretty much the same damn thing.

Exactly that isn't right. No one cares for compatibility of the main tree 
(eclasses, conflicts between ebuilds with regards to installed files) and 
Sunrise ebuilds.


Carsten

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

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

[Alex Tarkovsky]

On 8/2/06, Stephen P. Becker <geoman@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard...
> >
> > http://arcanux.org/scarecrow.png
>
> Ha ha ha! Oh gosh that's funny! That's really funny! Do you photoshop
> your own material? Do you? Because that is so fresh. Ciaranm is like a
> scarecrow. You know, I've, I've never heard anyone make that joke
> before. Hmm. You're the first. I've never heard anyone reference,
> reference that outside of irc before. Because that's what everyone who
> disagrees with him says right? Isn't it? He is a scarecrow. And, and yet
> you've taken that and posted it in this discussion to insult him in this
> everyday situation. God what a clever, smart person you must be, to come
> up with a joke like that all by yourself. That's so fresh too. Any, any
> George W. Bush jokes you want to throw out too as long as we're hitting
> these phenomena at the height of their popularity? God you're so funny!

There's a stark line between satire (my post) and invective (your
tirade). That you don't seem aware of its existence and decided to
exhibit this ignorance publicly is yet another reason I believe you
should retire as a Gentoo developer. Please, you're hurting Gentoo.
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Alex Tarkovsky]

On 8/2/06, Roy Marples <uberlord@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday 02 August 2006 15:27, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> > On Monday 31 July 2006 04:28, Dan Meltzer wrote:
> > > 1) Users can submit patches/ideas to bugs.g.o at whatever frequency
> > > they desire, contributing to gentoo casually.
> >
> > And the patch hanging in bugzilla forever because no-one wants to maintain
> > it. Sunrise could help here, by accepting properly written ebuilds that do
> > however not get maintenance.
>
> How does that help?
>
> User goes to bugzilla
> or
> User goes to sunrise
>
> User still has to go somewhere outside of the tree.
>
> Thanks

http://www.gentoo-sunrise.org/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq#ButBugzillaisactuallyeasier
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Wernfried Haas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 783 bytes --]

On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 02:53:58PM -0500, Alex Tarkovsky wrote:
> http://www.gentoo-sunrise.org/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq#ButBugzillaisactuallyeasier

says:
"We do think that Sunrise is easier."
[..]
"But in contrast to that it requires more knowledge and tools to get
something into sunrise - more work for contributors. Also contributors
have to get their ebuilds reviewed before committing - bugzilla is
easier here."

So perhaps some things are more complicated and each solution has
their (dis-)advantages. Hence it's not always best to drop a line to a
FAQ to prove a point.

cheers,
	Wernfried

-- 
Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne at gentoo dot org
Gentoo Forums: http://forums.gentoo.org
IRC: #gentoo-forums on freenode - email: forum-mods at gentoo dot org

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

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

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Wed, 2 Aug 2006 14:49:19 -0500 "Alex Tarkovsky"
<alextarkovsky@gmail.com> wrote:
| On 8/2/06, Stephen P. Becker <geoman@gentoo.org> wrote:
| > > Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard...
| > >
| > > http://arcanux.org/scarecrow.png
| >
| > Ha ha ha! Oh gosh that's funny! That's really funny! Do you
| > photoshop your own material? Do you? Because that is so fresh.
| > Ciaranm is like a scarecrow. You know, I've, I've never heard
| > anyone make that joke before. Hmm. You're the first. I've never
| > heard anyone reference, reference that outside of irc before.
| > Because that's what everyone who disagrees with him says right?
| > Isn't it? He is a scarecrow. And, and yet you've taken that and
| > posted it in this discussion to insult him in this everyday
| > situation. God what a clever, smart person you must be, to come up
| > with a joke like that all by yourself. That's so fresh too. Any,
| > any George W. Bush jokes you want to throw out too as long as we're
| > hitting these phenomena at the height of their popularity? God
| > you're so funny!
| 
| There's a stark line between satire (my post) and invective (your
| tirade).

No no. Stephen's post was beautifully ironic satire. Yours was just
a lame attempt at flamebait. Try sticking "Because that is so fresh."
into Google...

| That you don't seem aware of its existence and decided to
| exhibit this ignorance publicly is yet another reason I believe you
| should retire as a Gentoo developer. Please, you're hurting Gentoo.

Again, no, it's a sign that you don't get it and you should keep quiet
until you do. You're filling this list up with noise and not
contributing anything to the discussion. Please stop.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Jakub Moc]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 838 bytes --]

Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 2 Aug 2006 14:49:19 -0500 "Alex Tarkovsky"
> <alextarkovsky@gmail.com> wrote:
> | On 8/2/06, Stephen P. Becker <geoman@gentoo.org> wrote:
> | > > Every time you post it's like fingernails on a chalkboard...

> | > Ha ha ha! Oh gosh that's funny! That's really funny! 
> | There's a stark line between satire (my post) and invective (your
> | tirade).
> 
> No no. Stephen's post was beautifully ironic satire. 

ZOMG! This this to gentoo-blurb or whatever else, this thread is long
enough as it is even without this off-topic junk.


-- 
Best regards,

 Jakub Moc
 mailto:jakub@gentoo.org
 GPG signature:
 http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E
 Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95  B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3D9E

 ... still no signature   ;)


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

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

[Brian Harring]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7900 bytes --]

On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:05:15PM +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> First I'd like to state that I do offer my opinion. You don't have to like it, 
> but disqualifying it as flaming, while exactly doing this yourself, 
> disqualifies you.

*cough*.  bit hypocritical for you to lecture me about viewing 
your statements as 'flaming', and in the same breath label 
my own as 'flaming' ;)

Why am I pointing this out?  My initial points were that of "why the 
double standard", with you providing an apt example (while that's 
barbed, you did provide a perfect refresher of the definition).


> I'd appreciate, if you would try to have a controversial 
> discussion, without starting to loose your manners.

And I'd appreciate a less condescending tone.


> On Wednesday 02 August 2006 03:39, Brian Harring wrote:
> > 1) no security,
> >
> > Suggest you read their responses, and look into some of their material
> > (in particular their faq).
> >
> > Two levels.
> >
> > One, holding area (essentially).
> > Second level (what users get), is the reviewed branch.
> >
> > So... if you're arguing people can stick malicious shit into the first
> > level, yes, they could.
> > [...] 
> 
> You haven't read what I wrote, as I asked you to do.

You wrote 'no security'.  That's pretty fricking vague, can cover 
everything from no verification of sync'd contents, to their vcs 
security, to their screening processes, to vulns in their packages.

If you wanted to home in vulns in the source (which isn't security as 
much as 'vulnerabilities in the source'), be explicit.

Now on to the real points (yay)...

> My point isn't that 
> people add malicious ebuilds to the overlay. There're more subtle methods 
> anyway, given that the tree still isn't signed. I wrote about vulnerablities 
> in the upstream software, neither having a security team backing them up nor 
> GLSA's to be written.

1) same issue with the ebuilds sitting in bugzilla, going to hunt 
through bugzie marking each submitted ebuild when a security bug hits?

2) Response to that is that "there is no claim of support"- which is 
the same for sunrise.  Why are the rules different for sunrise then?

3) Assumption that sunrise will just be a dumping ground, without any 
form of maintainance is implicit here- if it becomes as such, already 
was stated it would get wedgied by the council.  So that leaves the 
angle of "they don't have a security team", which implies to actually 
handle nuking vulnerable ebuilds, one has to have a security team 
(obviously false).

Besides... frankly it's kind of BS to push the vuln angle onto sunrise 
when gentoo can't even clean out years old vulnerable packages from 
gentoo-x86 (that doesn't absolve sunrise from having to watch it, nor 
a potshot at the understaffed security team, merely that double 
standards suck).

You want to set a standard for 'em, fine, lets use the standard of the 
existing tree when compared to existing glsas- note that there may be 
vulns that gentoo doesn't have glsas for, or vulns that are in the 
security pipeline and haven't yet been issued as a glsa (since gentoo 
issues it after porting).

285 versions out of 24637 vulnerable (~1 out of every 86 vuln)
115 packages out of 11251 vulnreable (~1 out of every 98 vuln)

http://gentooexperimental.org/~ferringb/vuln.log

So... if that's the standard you want to hold them to, fine, state 
so- they may agree to it (although admittedly such a standard is 
stupid, there should be _no_ vuln packages).

Don't automatically assume they'll be worse however, let alone assume 
that gentoo-x86 is perfect (again, no double standards).


> > And... just cause I'm mildly sick of this bullshit,
> 
> And I'm sick of people, who miss the point.

As stated above, be concise then.  Your points came out of pretty 
much nowhere, poorly communicated, and rather vague in actually 
backing them up.  Which... at least from the "backing up the 
complaints", has been the theme for the screaming folk thus far.

If people are missing the point, there are two possibilities- either 
A) everyone else is a moron and too stupid to understand your 
points, or more likely B) you're communicating poorly.

Assuming that the other party is the idiot (a) when more likely then 
not it's you (B) isn't really a good way to try and get your say.


> > > 2) issues with eclass changes which will result in bug spam
> >
> > You're not supposed to change the exposed api of eclasses in the tree
> > (something y'all do violate I might add, which is a seperate QA
> > matter).  Same issue applies to the 'official' overlays offered by
> > devs also, and to the tree in general.
> 
> We can change eclasses all the time, assuming all relevant ebuilds in the tree 
> get adjusted - just that no one cares for any overlay.

No, actually you cannot.

Just because you update the tree doesn't mean you're not going and 
breaking binpkgs, or the vdb installation.

Read glep33 if you want the sordid back history and solution to it.

Like I said, y'all violate it, doesn't mean it's right.


> > It's a reaching statement, bluntly.  Using such an arguement has the
> > side affect of stating that no overlays should ever exist, because
> > they suffer the same potentials.
> 
> Local overlays are fine as the user exactly knows what he does in his private 
> overlay (and hopefully follows eclass changes), development overlays are fine 
> (assuming the group of people controls the releavant overlays as well), 
> overlays like Sunrise are problematic, not to use such anal words as you do.

Why are they problematic?  Because of your assumption that they won't 
maintain it?

It's the same thing as gentoo-x86 (I will keep stating that till it's 
grilled into peoples heads also), this is _not_ a new issue so why are 
people leveling issues of gentoo-x86 as new issues of sunrise?

So someone goes and breaks something in gentoo-x86 that breaks 
something for sunrise.  Fine, it's sunrises' mess to clean up; they've 
volunteered to do this work, I don't see how you can claim it as a 
negative when they've accepted it as part of _their_ work.


> > > 3) the fact that sunrise is a bunch of arbitrary packages, instead close
> > > related ones managed by one team, that does exactly maintain relevant
> > > packages.
> >
> > What the hell do you think the tree is?  It's a bunch of arbitrary
> > packages maintained loosely by subgroups of people; you're stating
> > that sunrise is too loose yet gentoo-x86 is fundamentally no
> > different.
> >
> > Sunrise is pretty much the same damn thing.
> 
> Exactly that isn't right. No one cares for compatibility of the main tree 
> (eclasses, conflicts between ebuilds with regards to installed files) and 
> Sunrise ebuilds.

Worth noting sunrise folk may be gentoo devs also- and as stated 
above, they're trying to extend beyond gentoo-x86; it's not like 
they're demanding you do things their way- far from it, it's actually 
the reverse, devs demanding things of sunrise.  You break their shit, 
they'll fix it (it's the nature of this relationship, even though it 
should be _cooperative_ instead of "get lost" that seems to be the 
norm now).

So again... how is this a negative?  It's *their* damn time- if you 
wanted to be an ass and go break their stuff, as retarded as it is you 
_could_ because they stepped up for the job.

Granted, they may give you the finger and quit, or your remaining 
fellow devs may rightfully boot you for playing games, but the point 
stands- they stepped up to do the work, including cleaning up 
anything y'all may break for them.

You're not limited- they're the ones limited via trying to not step on 
gentoo-x86's toes.  How is that a negative then?

~harring

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

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

[Lance Albertson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1480 bytes --]

Brian Harring wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:05:15PM +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
>> First I'd like to state that I do offer my opinion. You don't have to like it, 
>> but disqualifying it as flaming, while exactly doing this yourself, 
>> disqualifies you.
> 
> *cough*.  bit hypocritical for you to lecture me about viewing 
> your statements as 'flaming', and in the same breath label 
> my own as 'flaming' ;)
> 
> Why am I pointing this out?  My initial points were that of "why the 
> double standard", with you providing an apt example (while that's 
> barbed, you did provide a perfect refresher of the definition).
> 
> 
>> I'd appreciate, if you would try to have a controversial 
>> discussion, without starting to loose your manners.
> 
> And I'd appreciate a less condescending tone.

Can you two please stop with this child-like circle of blame? Its really
starting to get old. You don't need to have the last word on every
argument (either of you). If neither of you can agree, then just agree
to disagree. *gasp* Yes, that is an option in a technical debate. No
matter what either of you two think is technically right, you're both
right and both wrong.

/me goes back to lurking

-- 
Lance Albertson <ramereth@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager

---
GPG Public Key:  <http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc>
Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1  4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742

ramereth/irc.freenode.net


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

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

[Lance Albertson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4289 bytes --]

Brian Harring wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:05:15PM +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote:

>> Local overlays are fine as the user exactly knows what he does in his private 
>> overlay (and hopefully follows eclass changes), development overlays are fine 
>> (assuming the group of people controls the releavant overlays as well), 
>> overlays like Sunrise are problematic, not to use such anal words as you do.
> 
> Why are they problematic?  Because of your assumption that they won't 
> maintain it?
> 
> It's the same thing as gentoo-x86 (I will keep stating that till it's 
> grilled into peoples heads also), this is _not_ a new issue so why are 
> people leveling issues of gentoo-x86 as new issues of sunrise?
> 
> So someone goes and breaks something in gentoo-x86 that breaks 
> something for sunrise.  Fine, it's sunrises' mess to clean up; they've 
> volunteered to do this work, I don't see how you can claim it as a 
> negative when they've accepted it as part of _their_ work.

I think the point a lot of people are concerned about are packages that
contain libraries or other dependencies that reside in the sunrise tree.
There's a good chance that a package in the regular tree will link
against a package from sunrise, the user will have no idea or forget
that they installed that app from sunrise (and the dep exists), and a
bug arises. Who's fault is it? Is it the package maintainer in the
regular tree, or sunrise? How do you stop excessive bug traffic for
issues like this?

Another issue I think people are ignoring here is the fact that sunrise
isn't focused on a particular part of the tree. I think Ciaran made a
point earlier (that was probably ignored) about the fact of why we have
herds in the regular tree. They aren't perfect, but they still do a
decent job of gathering people who have a good understand about a
certain group of packages. I have a hard time believing that the same
type of quality exists with the number of devs working on it. The
difference between sunrise and say the php overlay is the fact that
sunrise isn't focused on a set of packages (just ones that people want
that aren't in the tree) compared to a focused set for a specific
purpose (php).

The more I think about it, I think there needs to be a separation
between "a sandbox for users to hone their ebuild skills" and "these
packages aren't in the tree yet, lets make the available somewhere
else". Perhaps the better solution is to have the herds manage their own
set of overlays must like php does. I imagine many herds won't have a
need for it, while others would (and probably already using it). What's
the real purpose of sunrise then? The sandbox/learning ground? Or a
place for ebuilds that are stuck in bugs? The sunrise project has been
fighting on the grounds of learning aspect, but most of the people are
having issues with the ebuild stomping ground side. If I remember right,
the primary reason the council voted to re-enact sunrise was because of
the learning side of it. I don't doubt that (if done right) would be a
great thing, but I have concerns on the implementation of the latter.

For an example:

To me, it would work better if the netmon herd brought on a user to help
with the netmon overlay. They would get specific 'training' on working
on netmon ebuilds. They could have done the 'bootcamp' at sunrise
initially, then moved onto the herd overlay for something a bit more
organized and better maintained. This would produce a part of the QA
that some people are in a fuss about, and some better organization.
Heck, maybe even some interaction with the sunrise group and netmon herd
would be great so that the education continues, but on other watchful eyes.

Basically, it boils down to organization of ebuilds and how they are
being watched. A group that watches all isn't a good idea to me, my idea
above makes more sense.

Anyways, I've been trying to keep quiet on this issue and decided I
could interject here :)

Cheers-

-- 
Lance Albertson <ramereth@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager

---
GPG Public Key:  <http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc>
Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1  4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742

ramereth/irc.freenode.net


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 188 bytes --]

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

[Brian Harring]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 9652 bytes --]

On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 10:27:04PM -0500, Lance Albertson wrote:
> Brian Harring wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 02, 2006 at 08:05:15PM +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> 
> >> Local overlays are fine as the user exactly knows what he does in his private 
> >> overlay (and hopefully follows eclass changes), development overlays are fine 
> >> (assuming the group of people controls the releavant overlays as well), 
> >> overlays like Sunrise are problematic, not to use such anal words as you do.
> > 
> > Why are they problematic?  Because of your assumption that they won't 
> > maintain it?
> > 
> > It's the same thing as gentoo-x86 (I will keep stating that till it's 
> > grilled into peoples heads also), this is _not_ a new issue so why are 
> > people leveling issues of gentoo-x86 as new issues of sunrise?
> > 
> > So someone goes and breaks something in gentoo-x86 that breaks 
> > something for sunrise.  Fine, it's sunrises' mess to clean up; they've 
> > volunteered to do this work, I don't see how you can claim it as a 
> > negative when they've accepted it as part of _their_ work.
> 
> I think the point a lot of people are concerned about are packages that
> contain libraries or other dependencies that reside in the sunrise tree.
> There's a good chance that a package in the regular tree will link
> against a package from sunrise, the user will have no idea or forget
> that they installed that app from sunrise (and the dep exists), and a
> bug arises.

http://www.gentoo-sunrise.org/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq

Specifically, for those who haven't done their reading, look for the 
"Can I commit everything I like to the overlay", specifically the 
rules involved for what goes in.

The short and skiny is that the arguement of "they'll have some 
package that breaks my package" is kind of daft- sunrise won't hold 
version bumps for packages in the tree (one exception to this is 
maintainer-needed that has sat, perhaps they can clarify that corner 
case).

For the maintainer-wanted, the developer who pulls the package in 
*should* be lifting from sunrise already.  Why?  Because whats there 
has actually been exposed to users, rather then them relying on a 
simple eyeballing of the ebuild from bugzilla instead.

That leaves the "will link against a package from sunrise"... covered 
the potentials above, the remaining case is a package in the tree 
linking against a maintainer-needed ebuild.

Funny thing, that's actually a bug in the developers package.  Daft I 
know, but it's actually a *good* thing to smoke those out, there 
should be no unstated linkage (if it ain't in the deps, it's 
a bug to use/link to it).


> Who's fault is it? Is it the package maintainer in the
> regular tree, or sunrise?

> How do you stop excessive bug traffic for issues like this?

Assumption is that there will be excessive bug traffic for issues like 
that.  Rules above imo lay it out well enough I don't think it'll 
occur at the level of "excessive".  Basically, sky is falling 
predictions- no one has hard facts since this is hypothetical, so it 
would be *nice* if people would at least recognize that they may be 
barking at a minimal issue.

*Plus*, with sunrise under gentoos thumb if it proves to be more 
trouble then it's worth, the plug can be pulled- that's the trade of 
it being official, they get hosting, y'all get an actual say in what 
they do.

If they do it externally, ain't much you can do- can't demand they do 
something (result of that if it were me would be a mooning), stuck 
requesting them to do what _y'all_ want.


> Another issue I think people are ignoring here is the fact that sunrise
> isn't focused on a particular part of the tree. I think Ciaran made a
> point earlier (that was probably ignored) about the fact of why we have
> herds in the regular tree. They aren't perfect, but they still do a
> decent job of gathering people who have a good understand about a
> certain group of packages. I have a hard time believing that the same
> type of quality exists with the number of devs working on it. The
> difference between sunrise and say the php overlay is the fact that
> sunrise isn't focused on a set of packages (just ones that people want
> that aren't in the tree) compared to a focused set for a specific
> purpose (php).

What is sunrises reason for existance?

It's meant to hold ebuilds that _rot_ in bugzilla in a place where 
people can work on them as needed, and folks who need the packages can 
use them.  They may get bit in the ass since it's a fairly raw repo 
(despite reviewed branch), but the purpose here is different; it's not 
intended as a dumping ground (and if it becomes one, council has 
stated their intentions), it's intended as a repo for people to get at 
the ebuilds in an easier way, and improve those ebuilds if there is 
interest.


> The more I think about it, I think there needs to be a separation
> between "a sandbox for users to hone their ebuild skills" and "these
> packages aren't in the tree yet

Honing your ebuild skills occurs via practing said ebuild skills.  

You're not making much of a point here frankly- if ebuild devs won't 
do a damn thing about an ebuild, who will?  That leaves people who are 
interested in the ebuild.

You're basically arguing here that because a dev (who has passed 
bluntly some arbitary chalk on the wall ebuild test) doesn't have an 
interest in the package, other folks shouldn't do anything with the 
ebuild.

Phrased that way, it sounds... a bit demanding and out of line.

There is a first level, and a second level.  What hits the second 
level is at least reviewed by others (something gentoo-x86 lacks).  

People _want_ the package, they wouldn't have submitted it to bugzie 
otherwise- if devs won't do the work, sunrise devs stepping up to help 
is the best you're going to get.

(and prior to anyone screaming "but they may suck", again, note the 
reviewing- it's a _good_ attempt to deal with that issue).


> Whats the real purpose of sunrise then? The sandbox/learning ground? Or a
> place for ebuilds that are stuck in bugs? The sunrise project has been
> fighting on the grounds of learning aspect, but most of the people are
> having issues with the ebuild stomping ground side. If I remember right,
> the primary reason the council voted to re-enact sunrise was because of
> the learning side of it. I don't doubt that (if done right) would be a
> great thing, but I have concerns on the implementation of the latter.

Bit daft to assume that sunrise can serve one, and only one purpose.  
See above, it provides

1) area for ebuilds that are bitrotting, thus trying to get a gain out 
of the original submitters work via sharing it _easily_ with others 
such that they can use/improve it as needed

2) a testing ground for ebuilds prior to actually hitting the tree.  
Fair bit easier of a sell for a package if it's been exposed to users 
for 6 months with minimal issue, versus looking at a bug and seeing 
just an ebuild

3) way to enable people who want these things, to contribute.  This is 
both the 'learning ground', and a way to sucker^Wbring more folk into 
the extended disfunctional family that is gentoo.

Further, sunrise is an opt-in setup.  People aren't forced to use it, 
just the same as people aren't forced to use ~arch.  If they *do*, 
they're taking on the costs of using it.


> For an example:
> 
> To me, it would work better if the netmon herd brought on a user to help
> with the netmon overlay. They would get specific 'training' on working
> on netmon ebuilds. They could have done the 'bootcamp' at sunrise
> initially, then moved onto the herd overlay for something a bit more
> organized and better maintained. This would produce a part of the QA
> that some people are in a fuss about, and some better organization.
> Heck, maybe even some interaction with the sunrise group and netmon herd
> would be great so that the education continues, but on other watchful eyes.
> 
> Basically, it boils down to organization of ebuilds and how they are
> being watched. A group that watches all isn't a good idea to me, my idea
> above makes more sense.

One question then.  What if netmon has no interest?

What then, because they don't care, for those users who have no 
option but to work locally, or start their own overlay if they want 
to share it?

Personally, I think herds stepping in and helping would be a good 
thing.  That said, it is _not_ their place to block others from 
volunteering their efforts (iow, herds doing territorial pissing 
should not fly).

If netmon doesn't want to do anything with sunrise, fine- then it 
falls to the general maintainers to watch over things.  That said, if 
netmon doesn't want any involvement, that shouldn't block others from 
trying to contribute (we see enough of that already in mainline 
gentoo).

Now if netmon thinks sunrise is screwing up their packages left and 
right, well take it to the council/devrel (whichever it falls under)- 
same way any other project <-> project issue should be dealt with.

yes, herd isn't strictly a project, but you get the point- don't like 
the implicit statement that sunrise is automatically second class 
citizen to the herd, thus the herd can boss them around.

Sunrise *should* defer to the herd when they're not making loco 
demands, hash out an optimal solution for all parties.  Having a 
defacto "we say it is so" doesn't enable such a setup however.

~harring

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

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

[Donnie Berkholz]

Lance Albertson wrote:
> I think the point a lot of people are concerned about are packages that
> contain libraries or other dependencies that reside in the sunrise tree.
> There's a good chance that a package in the regular tree will link
> against a package from sunrise, the user will have no idea or forget
> that they installed that app from sunrise (and the dep exists), and a
> bug arises. Who's fault is it? Is it the package maintainer in the
> regular tree, or sunrise? How do you stop excessive bug traffic for
> issues like this?

You create `emerge --info` output that details any packages on the 
system installed from an overlay.

Thanks,
Donnie
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 796 bytes --]

On Monday 31 July 2006 14:53, Bryan Ãstergaard wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 01:01:20PM +0200, Christian Andreetta wrote:
> > Many users (and I'm both a dev *and* a user) just could do much for
> > Gentoo, but when you're interested in a niche sector package, you *don't
> > have other choices* but
> >
> > 1) an endless wait for an open bug
> > 2) becoming dev for the good of all :-)
> > 3) just use your personal overlay, without sharing the results of your
> > efforts. If the bug in 1) is still open, why updating it with your
> > latest patches/revision bumps?
>
> 4) Bash devs to add your ebuild

Which one exactly. The point is that it is not on a dev's turf.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 200 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Resignation

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 741 bytes --]

On Monday 31 July 2006 10:21, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 31 Jul 2006 10:10:45 +0200 Simon Stelling <blubb@gentoo.org>
>
> wrote:
> | Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> | > Good intentions and trying to be helpful don't keep users or
> | > developers. Screwups lose users and developers.
> |
> | It's really funny to hear such a statement from a person who made
> | several great developers leave the project.
>
> No, what's funny is watching people do nothing when Sunrise really is
> making developers leave.

Ciaran,

The point is as valid now as it was 3 years ago. We accept that developers 
leave and don't care.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Gentoo Developer
Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 200 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Resignation

[Bryan Ãstergaard]

On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 08:49:31AM +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> On Monday 31 July 2006 14:53, Bryan Ãstergaard wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 31, 2006 at 01:01:20PM +0200, Christian Andreetta wrote:
> > > Many users (and I'm both a dev *and* a user) just could do much for
> > > Gentoo, but when you're interested in a niche sector package, you *don't
> > > have other choices* but
> > >
> > > 1) an endless wait for an open bug
> > > 2) becoming dev for the good of all :-)
> > > 3) just use your personal overlay, without sharing the results of your
> > > efforts. If the bug in 1) is still open, why updating it with your
> > > latest patches/revision bumps?
> >
> > 4) Bash devs to add your ebuild
> 
> Which one exactly. The point is that it is not on a dev's turf.
> 
Many ebuilds sitting in bugzie naturally falls under one herd or
another. And if you can't find any developer that should (likely) be
maintaining the ebuild you can always ask in the irc channels geared
towards users (#gentoo-bugs, #gentoo-dev-help, even #gentoo) or ask on
gentoo-dev ML. Lots of ways to get developers attentions imo.

Regards,
Bryan Østergaard
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Roy Bamford]

On 2006.08.03 04:27, Lance Albertson wrote:
[snip]

> There's a good chance that a package in the regular tree will link
> against a package from sunrise, the user will have no idea or forget
> that they installed that app from sunrise (and the dep exists), and a
> bug arises.
[snip]
> 
> Anyways, I've been trying to keep quiet on this issue and decided I
> could interject here :)
> 
> Cheers-
> 
> --
> Lance Albertson <ramereth@gentoo.org>
> Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager
> 
> ---
> GPG Public Key:  <http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc>
> Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1  4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742
> 
> ramereth/irc.freenode.net
> 

How can that happen ?
Devs working on the regular tree should not have any third party  
overlays installed in the test environment so their ebuild should fail  
testing because it can't resolve the dependancy lurking in the overlay.

What an I missing ?

Regards,

Roy Bamford

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Bryan Ãstergaard]

On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 10:46:22AM +0100, Roy Bamford wrote:
> On 2006.08.03 04:27, Lance Albertson wrote:
> [snip]
> 
> >There's a good chance that a package in the regular tree will link
> >against a package from sunrise, the user will have no idea or forget
> >that they installed that app from sunrise (and the dep exists), and a
> >bug arises.
> [snip]
> >
> >Anyways, I've been trying to keep quiet on this issue and decided I
> >could interject here :)
> >
> >Cheers-
> >
> >--
> >Lance Albertson <ramereth@gentoo.org>
> >Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager
> >
> >---
> >GPG Public Key:  <http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc>
> >Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1  4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742
> >
> >ramereth/irc.freenode.net
> >
> 
> How can that happen ?
> Devs working on the regular tree should not have any third party  
> overlays installed in the test environment so their ebuild should fail  
> testing because it can't resolve the dependancy lurking in the overlay.
> 
> What an I missing ?
> 
Automatic dependencies. Eg. configure picking up fooapp being installed
and enabling support for it without the ebuild explicitly
enabling/disabling it. Of course, this would be a bug in the ebuild and
should be fixed.

Regards,
Bryan Østergaard
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen]

On Thursday 03 August 2006 04:56, Brian Harring wrote:
<snipped alot>
> Besides... frankly it's kind of BS to push the vuln angle onto sunrise
> when gentoo can't even clean out years old vulnerable packages from
> gentoo-x86 (that doesn't absolve sunrise from having to watch it, nor
> a potshot at the understaffed security team, merely that double
> standards suck).
Just to clarify: AFAIR it has never been policy to remove vulnerable ebuilds. 

The Security Team leaves that up to the maintainers. For some issues it does 
make sense to keep vulnerable ebuilds in the tree (ie. latest Apache (GLSA 
200608-01, when not using mod_rewrite).

-- 
Sune Kloppenborg Jeppesen (Jaervosz)
Operational Manager
Gentoo Linux Security Team
http://security.gentoo.org
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Resignation

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Thu, 3 Aug 2006 08:58:32 +0200 Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| The point is as valid now as it was 3 years ago. We accept that
| developers leave and don't care.

I guess you've not been following Gentoo development as of late.
Current policy is that developers leaving is grounds to try to get
someone fired.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

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

[Carsten Lohrke]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 8721 bytes --]

On Thursday 03 August 2006 04:56, Brian Harring wrote:
> *cough*.  bit hypocritical for you to lecture me about viewing
> your statements as 'flaming', and in the same breath label
> my own as 'flaming' ;)
>
> Why am I pointing this out?  My initial points were that of "why the
> double standard", with you providing an apt example (while that's
> barbed, you did provide a perfect refresher of the definition).

The difference is that I argue, while you accuse me to play false. I consider 
this as ad hominem and together with all this "FUD" and "BS" calling, in 
contrary to my email, inflammatory.


> > I'd appreciate, if you would try to have a controversial
> > discussion, without starting to loose your manners.
>
> And I'd appreciate a less condescending tone.

This wasn't meant condescending, but a true request. Because it's not the 
first time you react this way, when you dislike another ones opinion. It is 
as annoying as Ciaran's habit to make statements without backing them up - 
even when asked to do so.


> You wrote 'no security'.  That's pretty fricking vague, can cover
> everything from no verification of sync'd contents, to their vcs
> security, to their screening processes, to vulns in their packages.

I wrote that you should read my replies in the initial thread.


> If you wanted to home in vulns in the source (which isn't security as
> much as 'vulnerabilities in the source'), be explicit.

I was.


> Now on to the real points (yay)...
>
> > My point isn't that
> > people add malicious ebuilds to the overlay. There're more subtle methods
> > anyway, given that the tree still isn't signed. I wrote about
> > vulnerablities in the upstream software, neither having a security team
> > backing them up nor GLSA's to be written.
>
> 1) same issue with the ebuilds sitting in bugzilla, going to hunt
> through bugzie marking each submitted ebuild when a security bug hits?
>
> 2) Response to that is that "there is no claim of support"- which is
> the same for sunrise.  Why are the rules different for sunrise then?

The difference is that people are using them in their local overlay and 
therefore - in contrary to the Sunrise overlay - a) are only exposed to the 
packges they _really_ want to use and b) are responsible for it themselves.

Aside of this I might add that I do add comments to bug reports, when I 
stumble about vulnerability notices and find relevant bug reports.


> 3) Assumption that sunrise will just be a dumping ground, without any
> form of maintainance is implicit here- if it becomes as such, already
> was stated it would get wedgied by the council.  So that leaves the
> angle of "they don't have a security team", which implies to actually
> handle nuking vulnerable ebuilds, one has to have a security team
> (obviously false).

Dumping ground or not. It's easy to miss vulnerability notices. Especially, if 
you don't have guys who expclicitly care for it. And you need a security team 
to announce issue to the user base. I wouldn't use Gentoo, if we not had such 
a hard and good working security team.


> Besides... frankly it's kind of BS to push the vuln angle onto sunrise
> when gentoo can't even clean out years old vulnerable packages from
> gentoo-x86 (that doesn't absolve sunrise from having to watch it, nor
> a potshot at the understaffed security team, merely that double
> standards suck).

Interesting to see you state this. Because this is a far more serious problem, 
than supporting "everything" possible; And Sunrise won't fix this either - if 
not the opposite. One of the goals of Sunrise is to recruit new devs. But we 
don't need new devs to add new packages primarily, we more to maintain 
existing and not so fancy stuff and to clean out the tree.


> You want to set a standard for 'em, fine, lets use the standard of the
> existing tree when compared to existing glsas- note that there may be
> vulns that gentoo doesn't have glsas for, or vulns that are in the
> security pipeline and haven't yet been issued as a glsa (since gentoo
> issues it after porting).
>
> 285 versions out of 24637 vulnerable (~1 out of every 86 vuln)
> 115 packages out of 11251 vulnreable (~1 out of every 98 vuln)
>
> http://gentooexperimental.org/~ferringb/vuln.log
>
> So... if that's the standard you want to hold them to, fine, state
> so- they may agree to it (although admittedly such a standard is
> stupid, there should be _no_ vuln packages).

Your list is rubbish. There're stable versions for all security wise supported 
architectures and the relevant GLSA's. If users don't use them, it's their 
local problem.


> > > And... just cause I'm mildly sick of this bullshit,
> >
> > And I'm sick of people, who miss the point.
>
> As stated above, be concise then.  Your points came out of pretty
> much nowhere, poorly communicated, and rather vague in actually
> backing them up.  Which... at least from the "backing up the
> complaints", has been the theme for the screaming folk thus far.

Do I have to learn you to read? See above.


> > We can change eclasses all the time, assuming all relevant ebuilds in the
> > tree get adjusted - just that no one cares for any overlay.
>
> No, actually you cannot.
>
> Just because you update the tree doesn't mean you're not going and
> breaking binpkgs, or the vdb installation.
>
> Read glep33 if you want the sordid back history and solution to it.
>
> Like I said, y'all violate it, doesn't mean it's right.

Is that a joke or what? I do support GLEP 33, but it's not implemented yet. 
Also I can change eclasses in many ways breaking third party ebuilds, but not 
binary packages. That aside, relying on binary packages without taking a 
snapshot of the tree is rather brave. Gentoo is a more or less dynamic source 
distribution and there is no ensurance binary packages will work "forever".


> > Local overlays are fine as the user exactly knows what he does in his
> > private overlay (and hopefully follows eclass changes), development
> > overlays are fine (assuming the group of people controls the releavant
> > overlays as well), overlays like Sunrise are problematic, not to use such
> > anal words as you do.
>
> Why are they problematic?  Because of your assumption that they won't
> maintain it?

As I said: Security issue, eclass incompatiblities. Want another example? Here 
it is: What if you have packges that need to block each other (usually 
because of installing the same files). Mutual cross overlay blockers? Forget 
it.


> So someone goes and breaks something in gentoo-x86 that breaks
> something for sunrise.  Fine, it's sunrises' mess to clean up; they've
> volunteered to do this work, I don't see how you can claim it as a
> negative when they've accepted it as part of _their_ work.

The problems will pile up in bugs.g.o and "usally" with the wrong addressee. 
This has been every now and then the case with other overlays as well as 
users of distros building on Gentoo. I can live with that to a degree. But 
when we do this mess ourselves, it get's highly annoying.


> Worth noting sunrise folk may be gentoo devs also- and as stated
> above, they're trying to extend beyond gentoo-x86; it's not like
> they're demanding you do things their way- far from it, it's actually
> the reverse, devs demanding things of sunrise.  You break their shit,
> they'll fix it (it's the nature of this relationship, even though it
> should be _cooperative_ instead of "get lost" that seems to be the
> norm now).
>
> So again... how is this a negative?  It's *their* damn time- if you
> wanted to be an ass and go break their stuff, as retarded as it is you
> _could_ because they stepped up for the job.

I have answered all that above.


> Granted, they may give you the finger and quit, or your remaining
> fellow devs may rightfully boot you for playing games, but the point
> stands- they stepped up to do the work, including cleaning up
> anything y'all may break for them.

You're doing it again. No I'm not playig games with you. I have reasonable 
complaints and consider this sort of overlay a failure. Then an extra 
development tree would be much better.


> You're not limited- they're the ones limited via trying to not step on
> gentoo-x86's toes.  How is that a negative then?

I fear for the security of our user base, especially the lazy, uneducated 
ricers and how this wll reflect on Gentoo's reputation as a whole. I fear 
more annoying, invalid bug reports. I don't see any benefit for the existing 
tree or Gentoo as a whole.


Carsten

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

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

[Patrick Lauer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 7080 bytes --]

On Thu, 2006-08-03 at 18:21 +0200, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> The difference is that I argue, while you accuse me to play false. I consider 
> this as ad hominem and together with all this "FUD" and "BS" calling, in 
> contrary to my email, inflammatory.
... and that is inflammatory :-)

> > > I'd appreciate, if you would try to have a controversial
> > > discussion, without starting to loose your manners.
> >
> > And I'd appreciate a less condescending tone.
> 
> This wasn't meant condescending, but a true request. Because it's not the 
> first time you react this way, when you dislike another ones opinion. It is 
> as annoying as Ciaran's habit to make statements without backing them up - 
> even when asked to do so.
I think it's a language barrier - as you (and I) are not native english speakers we tend to put a different emphasis on words.
What may look perfectly polite to you could be a big insult to a french
or japanese speaker ...

That being said, I'd interpret what you've written as mildly
condescending too.


> > 3) Assumption that sunrise will just be a dumping ground, without any
> > form of maintainance is implicit here- if it becomes as such, already
> > was stated it would get wedgied by the council.  So that leaves the
> > angle of "they don't have a security team", which implies to actually
> > handle nuking vulnerable ebuilds, one has to have a security team
> > (obviously false).
> 
> Dumping ground or not. It's easy to miss vulnerability notices. Especially, if 
> you don't have guys who expclicitly care for it. And you need a security team 
> to announce issue to the user base. I wouldn't use Gentoo, if we not had such 
> a hard and good working security team.
> 
I wonder if all inofficial overlays and bugs are always updated?
Sunrise is still young, but the way they've handled bugreports makes me
quite confident that they'll be able to handle security issues when they
have reached a stable and sustainable size. 

> > Besides... frankly it's kind of BS to push the vuln angle onto sunrise
> > when gentoo can't even clean out years old vulnerable packages from
> > gentoo-x86 (that doesn't absolve sunrise from having to watch it, nor
> > a potshot at the understaffed security team, merely that double
> > standards suck).
> 
> Interesting to see you state this. Because this is a far more serious problem, 
> than supporting "everything" possible; And Sunrise won't fix this either - if 
> not the opposite. One of the goals of Sunrise is to recruit new devs. But we 
> don't need new devs to add new packages primarily, we more to maintain 
> existing and not so fancy stuff and to clean out the tree.
> 
How do you train devs?
Also, who is only working on the things he did when he initially became
dev?

[snip]
> Your list is rubbish. There're stable versions for all security wise supported 
> architectures and the relevant GLSA's. If users don't use them, it's their 
> local problem.
If users use sunrise it's their local problem, too. 
> 
> > > > And... just cause I'm mildly sick of this bullshit,
> > >
> > > And I'm sick of people, who miss the point.
> >
> > As stated above, be concise then.  Your points came out of pretty
> > much nowhere, poorly communicated, and rather vague in actually
> > backing them up.  Which... at least from the "backing up the
> > complaints", has been the theme for the screaming folk thus far.
> 
> Do I have to learn you to read? See above.
^^ that is really condescending. 


> > So someone goes and breaks something in gentoo-x86 that breaks
> > something for sunrise.  Fine, it's sunrises' mess to clean up; they've
> > volunteered to do this work, I don't see how you can claim it as a
> > negative when they've accepted it as part of _their_ work.
> 
> The problems will pile up in bugs.g.o and "usally" with the wrong addressee. 
> This has been every now and then the case with other overlays as well as 
> users of distros building on Gentoo. I can live with that to a degree. But 
> when we do this mess ourselves, it get's highly annoying.
Hmmm?
The problem with most other overlays is that they also may have updated
or patched versions of in-tree applications. Most problems that you
claim should not happen in sunrise.

> > Granted, they may give you the finger and quit, or your remaining
> > fellow devs may rightfully boot you for playing games, but the point
> > stands- they stepped up to do the work, including cleaning up
> > anything y'all may break for them.
> 
> You're doing it again. No I'm not playig games with you. I have reasonable 
> complaints and consider this sort of overlay a failure. Then an extra 
> development tree would be much better.

I still fail to see what your issues with it are. All the points you
stated are either invalid or not an issue from my p.o.v.

> 
> > You're not limited- they're the ones limited via trying to not step on
> > gentoo-x86's toes.  How is that a negative then?
> 
> I fear for the security of our user base, especially the lazy, uneducated 
> ricers and how this wll reflect on Gentoo's reputation as a whole. 
What is Gentoo's reputation? I mean ... people have said this a few
times, but has anyone just asked a random subset of linux users how they
see Gentoo?

I guess having a reputation of being bleeding edge, having fast-paced
development (with many transient bugs because of the rapid pace of
change) and being really easy to use conflicts really hard with Sunrise,
right?

> I fear 
> more annoying, invalid bug reports. I don't see any benefit for the existing 
> tree or Gentoo as a whole.
So ignore it. You don't have to use it, but you're trying to limit other
devs and users (who may become devs) in their freedom to work on any
aspect of gentoo they like. 
Ebuilds rotting for years in bugzilla (and bugzilla can be quite
confusing to use) can not be better than a maintained overlay where
people even review ebuilds for mistakes. I wonder why you're implicitly
advocating the worse policy, that (from my point of view) is silly and
more damaging to Gentoo, if anything is getting damaged at all.

I don't see any benefits in not supporting (or just passively ignoring)
sunrise. If it fails you can still pull the plug, but until now it has
been quite successful in finding motivated users and putting them to
use. Granted, communication has been difficult,but the reactions from
some devs look really bizzare and extreme to me.
(Just food for thought - you shut down sunrise. I pick up the pieces,
host it on my hardware and do what I want. You can't stop me, you can't
influence my policies, you haven't gained a thing. Users still use The
Overlay Formerly Known as Sunrise and complain that Gentoo sucks
(because that overlay has wrecked their machine, I'm a mean bastard
after all! 
That's why you should keep Sunrise running and controllable by Gentoo
people.)


Have fun,

Patrick
-- 
Stand still, and let the rest of the universe move

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]