From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev-return-4020-arch-gentoo-dev=gentoo.org@gentoo.org>
Received: (qmail 18745 invoked by uid 1002); 25 Jun 2003 05:26:33 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev-unsubscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev-subscribe@gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Received: (qmail 14984 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2003 05:26:33 -0000
From: Tony Clark <tclark@telia.com>
To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 07:26:32 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.5.2
References: <20030625013328.GA10762@inventor.gentoo.org> <200306250502.32174.tclark@telia.com> <20030625040446.GA27460@cerberus.oppresses.us>
In-Reply-To: <20030625040446.GA27460@cerberus.oppresses.us>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200306250726.32233.tclark@telia.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] *IMPORTANT* top-level management structure!
X-Archives-Salt: e5171868-4a21-4bec-9efe-f3801e03f653
X-Archives-Hash: c5ae3a6f75ff79b1192826c1b6c92346

On Wednesday 25 June 2003 06.04, Jon Portnoy wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 05:02:32AM +0200, Tony Clark wrote:
> > On Wednesday 25 June 2003 03.33, Daniel Robbins wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
> > 1.  What is Gentoo 1.4.  What it may have been intended to be in January
> > is probably not what it is going to be now.  Before you recruit all and
> > sundry you have to define this as if it isn't defined everything will
> > fall down and chaos will return.  Some basic things I see is that it
> > needs to be are: gcc3.3 based
> > glibc2.3.2
> > openssl0.9.7
>
> We can do this if you want to wait another couple of months.
>
> Unfortunately, there are some requests to have 1.4 ready for LWESF at
> the beginning of Augusy
This is just classical, happens everyday type stuff in electronics/software 
companies, espically ones who don't know what they are building with clear 
goals.  Marketing keeps moving the requirements and dates aren't met.  Some 
deadline finally gets set and a patch work job happens to meet THE DATE.

> This is not viable. The tree is not gcc3.3-ready and OpenSSL 0.9.7 needs
> a much more mature upgrade path, otherwise there will be serious
> breakage (you need to remerge wget without ssl support, then merge the
> new openssl, then rebuild everything depending on it currently).
The OpenSSL upgrade is really ready, it just that the whole tree needs a 
rebuild which is time consumming.  You have to break the cycle sooner or 
later.  Seems to me one solution is to release a binary version of 1.4 build 
with the latest OpenSSL goes someway to ease that upgrade.  Users can get a 
working basic system maybe with kde and gnome desktops then add or rebuild at 
their own pace.  New takers have no problems as they are current.  GCC is a 
slightly different problem but not as large.  I guess it could be solved 
putting different versions of GCC in slots.  Glibc is pretty well there and 
doesn't seem to have any problems that I have noticed.

>
> > 2.  What are the core applications.  Is it a desktop, a server orinitated
> > system or a system compremised to do both.  I would suggest desktop as I
> > think thats what it is mainly used for, but I don't have the stats so I
> > could be well off the mark. (Market research required)
>
> I don't understand what you mean by 'core applications' in this context.
I think of core applications as things people are actually going to use to do 
something outside of maintaining their systems.  ie desktop, browser, apache 
etc.  verses core-system stuff like kernels, tools, portage etc.

> > 3.  What platform should be supported at release time.  Here I think x86
> > and maybe x86-64.  Targeting too many will just delay it.  Have some
> > other dates for the rest to follow.
>
> We target all platforms that're release-ready. Right now, that's x86,
> ppc, and sparc. Release-ready means the tree is prepped, the stages and
> LiveCDs can be built, install documents are up on the site.

Well if you ask me, thats too many for an August deadline.  Do the best that 
can be done with x86 and have the rest follow by a month.  That way any nasty 
bugs can be squashed before the other 2 hit the stand but I guess the 
Marketing Dept has mandated that all 3 will be ready at the same time. :)

>
> > These are just really fundementals but until the requirements are
> > documented things will never really come together.
> >
> > Get things out in the open.  Gentoo-core is probably the worst idea
> > someone ever came up with, OSS development is meant to be a very
> > transparent process. Make it transparent.  I know there are always
> > private issues but if they involve more than 3 people then perhaps they
> > should be public.
>
> We are making it transparent by discussing development on gentoo-dev.
Don't tell me, someone woke up this morning and formed a new management 
structure, honest :)  You know you need this transparent as it is the only 
hope of it getting done in time.  It's not a big deal for me actually, it's 
just that of ppl where primed and ready for the announcement you would be 
more than halfway towards meeting the objectives.

Anyway, from another comment it is impossible to define goals for Gentoo 
therefore I would submit it is impossible to have a 1.4 release.  I have no 
problems with that, marketing probably does though.

tony
-- 
Contract ASIC and FPGA design.
Telephone +46 702 894 667
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x633E2623



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list