From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.1 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_NONE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from chamber.cco.caltech.edu (chamber.cco.caltech.edu [131.215.48.55]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3F65A20ED9E5 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 2002 19:04:16 -0600 (CST) Received: from there (PPP-36-51.caltech.edu [131.215.36.51]) by chamber.cco.caltech.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id RAA29588 for ; Sat, 16 Mar 2002 17:00:35 -0800 (PST) Message-Id: <200203170100.RAA29588@chamber.cco.caltech.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="koi8-r" From: George Shapovalov To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Unstable branch proposal - second round Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2002 17:04:26 -0800 X-Mailer: KMail [version 1.3.2] References: <5.1.0.14.2.20020416171218.00ad1f28@mail.cybrains.net> <5.1.0.14.2.20020416180627.02c7eeb0@mail.cybrains.net> In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020416180627.02c7eeb0@mail.cybrains.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: b827e2f5-ea6f-4a3b-8024-df7d9e6e979a X-Archives-Hash: b016fe822ba9559999cacd24d36dfe9a Well, the main idea I try to put up here is to expose new ebuilds as much= as=20 possible by pushing ALL submissions to the portage tree for people who wa= nt=20 to see what's up on the table, while maintaining only the stable core acc= ess=20 for people who only need thoroughly tested stuff.=20 If something can be easily setup to simplify ebuild submission process th= is=20 is fine and in fact does not change much the idea. bugs.gentoo.org is pre= tty=20 simple IMHO, and majority of users are developers, while as far as I can = tell=20 linux newcomers are not uncommon to gentoo either. Please see my new post for clarification. In short I feel that it is=20 necessary to introduce multiple ebuild-state levels to better represent t= he=20 "real-world life of a package", which will also help end-users to follow = the=20 stock and contribute to what he feels necessary even just voting for pack= age=20 he wants to see. George On Tuesday 16 April 2002 15:08, you wrote: > Yeah, pretty much. However, Freshports looks more developer centrix th= an > end-user > centric as Freshmeat appears to me. > > I think it is important to keep the end user who's going to be trying t= o > make intelligent decisions about which ebuilds to download as your cent= ral > audience. > > At 04:09 PM 3/16/2002 -0600, you wrote: > > > The beauty of this? Those familiar with Freshmeat barely have to l= earn > > > a new interface and the whole Freshmeat site has *got* to be open > > > source available somewhere to make this a fast start towards this s= ort > > > of vision. > > > >Do you essentially mean http://www.freshports.org/ with comments? > > > >_______________________________________________ > >gentoo-dev mailing list > >gentoo-dev@gentoo.org > >http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev > > President > www.cybrains.net > > "All things should be as simple as possible, but no simpler" -- Albert > Einstein > > _______________________________________________ > gentoo-dev mailing list > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org > http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev