[gentoo-dev] Portage features implementation

[Daniel Robbins <drobbins@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1840 bytes --]

On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 08:28:23PM +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> Personally I have only one issue that could be addressed. It concerns portage. 
> There are many features that portage will implement someday and that have 
> allready been identified. Many of those TODO's have been there a long time. 
> While I know that it is necessary to keep portage stable, and I know that 
> adding features is much work, I would like to know the status of those 
> features.

Me too :) In our existing management structure, you'll see that carpaski is
the operational manager for portage, and as such will be responsible for
providing weekly updates on the status of his project, just like all
managers will. These status updates will be publicly available and linked to
on our Web site. You'll also see that I specifically listed a "package
research" sub-project that will be involved in architecting new
functionality for Portage.

Also, if other projects or sub-projects need functionality in Portage, they
can inform their respective top-level managers about these needed features.
Then it's the the responsibility of that top-level manager to communicate these
needs to carpaski at the top-level manager meeting, and coordinating with
carpaski to find an agreeable and reasonable schedule for implementation.

This is how it is intended to work for all projects that have specific needs
from other projects. Your respective top-level manager should be your
ombudsman and work to get needed features on the roadmap of other projects.

I believe that this arrangement address all your concerns. Please let me
know if that's not the case, and anyone is welcome to chime in if they see
an opportunity to improve this process.

Best Regards,

-- 
Daniel Robbins
Chief Architect, Gentoo Linux
http://www.gentoo.org

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