From: Ferris McCormick <fmccor@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:55:02 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1226426102.6035.341.camel@liasis.inforead.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <pan.2008.11.11.17.26.51@cox.net>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2182 bytes --]
On Tue, 2008-11-11 at 17:26 +0000, Duncan wrote:
> Jeroen Roovers <jer@gentoo.org> posted
> 20081111172450.04e02b38@epia.jer-c2.orkz.net, excerpted below, on Tue, 11
> Nov 2008 17:24:50 +0100:
>
> > Words
> > like "production", "critical" and "important" can be applied as easily
> > to the state of a company's or nation's system as to a single person's.
>
> Yes, but it's a relative thing. They obviously do what they can with the
> resources they have (are willing to dedicate). We do the same. A user's
> single system will absolutely be important to him, no doubt about it, but
> if he doesn't believe it worth "superhuman" feats or prioritizing to
> ensure it's safety, neither should we.
I think I understand what you mean here, but it's not what you wrote as
best as I can tell. As a developer, I believe it is my responsibility
to work a bit harder just so that the users don't have to resort to
'"superhuman" feats' to keep their systems running. I do agree that no
matter what we provide, all users (including ourselves) will have to
expend some effort to take advantage of it.
> No, we don't go around
> purposefully breaking things, but both he and we have limits to our
> resources and certain priorities in their allocation, and if he's not
> placing undue priority on the safety of his machine, why is it even a
> question if we will? The presumption should be actions within the bounds
> of rational reality and prioritization of resources for both users and
> their distribution, us. No more, no less.
>
> IOW, I'd have agreed if the point was that it's a machine that's useful
> to the user and that he doesn't want broken, and we should behave
> accordingly, but the triple emphasis of important, production, critical,
> seemed a bit undue for the lengths to which an ordinary user goes or the
> priority he reveals by his own actions. And if his actions reveal a
> SERIOUS priority in the area, than he's already covered by definition.
> That's all I was saying.
Regards,
Ferris
--
Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <fmccor@gentoo.org>
Developer, Gentoo Linux (Sparc, Userrel, Trustees)
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 197 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2008-11-11 17:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 36+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2008-11-10 18:13 [gentoo-dev] Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds Mark Loeser
2008-11-10 18:23 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2008-11-10 18:23 ` Mart Raudsepp
2008-11-10 20:32 ` Steev Klimaszewski
2008-11-10 21:16 ` Jeremy Olexa
2008-11-10 21:57 ` Santiago M. Mola
2008-11-11 0:24 ` Jose Luis Rivero
2008-11-11 1:13 ` Mark Loeser
2008-11-11 9:31 ` Jose Luis Rivero
2008-11-11 1:21 ` Richard Freeman
2008-11-11 8:56 ` Peter Volkov
2008-11-11 10:18 ` Jose Luis Rivero
2008-11-11 13:49 ` Ferris McCormick
2008-11-11 16:06 ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2008-11-11 16:24 ` Jeroen Roovers
2008-11-11 17:26 ` Duncan
2008-11-11 17:55 ` Ferris McCormick [this message]
2008-11-11 18:12 ` Jeroen Roovers
2008-11-11 21:03 ` Duncan
2008-11-13 17:38 ` [gentoo-dev] " Tobias Scherbaum
2008-11-15 13:02 ` Matti Bickel
2008-11-17 18:08 ` Tobias Scherbaum
2008-11-17 19:03 ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2008-12-11 5:35 ` [gentoo-dev] " Donnie Berkholz
2008-11-17 0:38 ` [gentoo-dev] " Ryan Hill
2008-11-17 15:10 ` Daniel Gryniewicz
2008-11-18 1:08 ` Ryan Hill
2008-11-18 16:57 ` Daniel Gryniewicz
2008-11-18 17:50 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2008-11-18 20:31 ` Daniel Gryniewicz
2008-11-18 21:18 ` Ryan Hill
2008-11-18 22:04 ` Daniel Gryniewicz
2008-11-18 22:45 ` Ryan Hill
2008-11-30 22:59 ` Ryan Hill
2008-12-01 7:49 ` Peter Volkov
2008-12-11 5:37 ` [gentoo-dev] " Donnie Berkholz
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1226426102.6035.341.camel@liasis.inforead.com \
--to=fmccor@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox