[gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

Dev's,

Its becoming increasingly common place these days for program to sit in ~x86 
for a long time. I am curious why this is? Kde 3.2.3 is still in testing. 
Whats taking so long? June 24  is a long time to test a production ready 
application, as kde feels it is.

There are other packages I have found I am having to force upgrading myself on 
these days just to get. mysql is still on 4.018, they are on 20 now.

Whats going on over there?
Jeff
- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 	      Live Faust, Die Jung, Leave it to Beaver.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA7sJ/ld4MRA3gEwYRAl/2AKDIOrrwz4YKxA2uk/HNxWmqYQctxQCgi4h/
mb/vx1/VfXFDS3tEn/uAKNE=
=HjPw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Caleb Tennis]

On Friday 09 July 2004 11:06 am, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> Whats going on over there?

Not enough people/time to keep up with it.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 11:09 am, Caleb Tennis wrote:
> On Friday 09 July 2004 11:06 am, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > Whats going on over there?
>
> Not enough people/time to keep up with it.

So, your telling me they have time to release a kde. 3.3.0 beta version of the 
ebuilds, but they can't release 3.2.3? 

That doesn't make sense. 

- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote:   I ray-traced my .signature, but forgot to include a light source.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA7sTUld4MRA3gEwYRAglaAJ9hpR6qbrTFpsJGE3W2jxlIG2+H6wCfXjuT
hGGqs99JZVCwB7O3VgcbFOE=
=hm1x
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2073 bytes --]

On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 12:06, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> Its becoming increasingly common place these days for program to sit in ~x86 
> for a long time. I am curious why this is? Kde 3.2.3 is still in testing. 
> Whats taking so long? June 24  is a long time to test a production ready 
> application, as kde feels it is.

We do not rely on the upstream author's indications on whether a package
is stable in our tree or not.  There are many reasons for this,
including the fact that we allow for easily changing of CFLAGS and other
compilation options that can affect an installation.

If you find something to be quite stable, then let us know.

> There are other packages I have found I am having to force upgrading myself on 
> these days just to get. mysql is still on 4.018, they are on 20 now.

Is it 100% necessary to stay on the latest package?  Was there a
security vulnerability fixed by the new version?  If not, upgrading
simply because there is a newer version isn't always our top priority. 
Often times, we are simply too busy to write a new ebuild, test the new
ebuild, and commit it for every version.  In many cases we are
understaffed, even with our enormous developer base.

> Whats going on over there?

You have to remember that many of us are volunteers and are unable to
spend a large amount of time on Gentoo.  We have jobs, families, and
other commitments than Gentoo.

With Gentoo, it really does hold true that if you want something done,
you should do it yourself.  Create ebuilds.  Post them to
bugs.gentoo.org.  If you think a package has been in testing too long,
report not only on your failures, but also on your successes.  Many
times packages will be delayed simply because there hasn't been enough
testing done, or the package simply gets forgotten about for a while. 
We are a community-based distribution.  For things to get done quickly,
we *require* the help of the community.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1164 bytes --]

On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 12:16, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> So, your telling me they have time to release a kde. 3.3.0 beta version of the 
> ebuilds, but they can't release 3.2.3? 

Have you written a release for it?

If not, I don't think you're in any position to criticize, no offense.

Perhaps the 3.3.0 version was submitted already completed by a user? 
Maybe the developer who was working on the 3.2.3 version had a death in
his family.  Maybe none of the developers are working on it.  Maybe
they've been working on it and there is a major bug in it that isn't in
the 3.3.0 version.

There's thousands of reasons why this can happen, and any one of them
could be the case here.

> That doesn't make sense. 

It makes perfect sense.  We are not full-time employees of the Gentoo
Foundation.  We do not get paid to do this.  We don't spend 40 hours a
week hacking on Gentoo... Well, some of us do, but most don't.  The ones
that do are crazy.  Try to avoid them when you see them talking to
themselves in a corner... ;]

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 11:28 am, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> We do not rely on the upstream author's indications on whether a package
> is stable in our tree or not.  There are many reasons for this,
> including the fact that we allow for easily changing of CFLAGS and other
> compilation options that can affect an installation.

I am aware.

> Is it 100% necessary to stay on the latest package?  Was there a
> security vulnerability fixed by the new version?  If not, upgrading
> simply because there is a newer version isn't always our top priority.
> Often times, we are simply too busy to write a new ebuild, test the new
> ebuild, and commit it for every version.  In many cases we are
> understaffed, even with our enormous developer base.

You missed it. Both of these HAVE ebuilds.. Its just a matter of changing them
over to x86 from ~x86. Thats my point, how hard can this be?

Yes, Kde sent out a maintance release, and kdenetwork has the fix for the
yahoo bug.

> You have to remember that many of us are volunteers and are unable to
> spend a large amount of time on Gentoo.  We have jobs, families, and
> other commitments than Gentoo.

Your right. Read above, the time was spend already creating the ebuilds.  AND,
new ebuilds are being created but nothing is being moved to x86. Thats my
issue. Not about when the ebuilds are created.

> With Gentoo, it really does hold true that if you want something done,
> you should do it yourself.  Create ebuilds.  Post them to
> bugs.gentoo.org.  If you think a package has been in testing too long,
> report not only on your failures, but also on your successes.  Many
> times packages will be delayed simply because there hasn't been enough
> testing done, or the package simply gets forgotten about for a while.
> We are a community-based distribution.  For things to get done quickly,
> we *require* the help of the community.

Read above. And I do create ebuilds when I need them. And I have upgraded to
the new kde. That doesn't change the fact that its a pain to stay in x86 when
you manually have to upgrade things all the time since they sit in the ~x86
tree for months.. (in some cases)

And don't give me emails about moving up to ~x86. Why have the two versions
for a reason. if we are all gonna sit in ~x86, then why even go have it.

Jeff

- --
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 	Do not adjust your mind, there is a fault in reality.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA7sqSld4MRA3gEwYRAsTSAKDE7U0ghOkak91IwgU/ijUzLq7ytACgvepm
8QQi8t0la9nRPPO+KJOhRUg=
=EdiS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 11:40 am, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> And don't give me emails about moving up to ~x86. Why have the two versions
> for a reason. if we are all gonna sit in ~x86, then why even go have it.

Wow, did I not check those last two lines? 

Should say:
And don't give me the emails about moving up to ~x86 either. We have the two 
versions for a reason, and I should have to. Why do we have the two tree's, 
if they we are all gonna be in ~x86.

- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote:        You know you're dieting when postage stamps taste good.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD4DBQFA7st3ld4MRA3gEwYRAsYiAKDko0+6Y53exo6mHeYnnlG+d5aprwCXW2IV
5kWOxb0FaGRYNp1jvbxs0A==
=bAVm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Corey Shields]

On Friday 09 July 2004 11:06 am, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> Its becoming increasingly common place these days for program to sit in
> ~x86 for a long time. I am curious why this is? Kde 3.2.3 is still in
> testing. Whats taking so long? June 24  is a long time to test a production
> ready application, as kde feels it is.
> Whats going on over there?

If I remember correctly, the KDE team is a 1-3 man team.  That's a hell of a 
package to be maintained and tested by just a few people.

-C

-- 
Corey Shields - Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team
http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Corey Shields]

On Friday 09 July 2004 11:44 am, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > And don't give me emails about moving up to ~x86. Why have the two
> > versions for a reason. if we are all gonna sit in ~x86, then why even go
> > have it.
> Should say:
> And don't give me the emails about moving up to ~x86 either. We have the
> two versions for a reason, and I should have to. Why do we have the two
> tree's, if they we are all gonna be in ~x86.

I'm still missing your point here..?

I'm not sure what the situation with 3.2.3 is right now, but have you checked 
to see if there are outstanding (gentoo) bugs remaining?  If there are, then 
they should be resolved before the ~x86 flag is removed.  I am sure that 
Caleb would welcome any help that you could give him in testing and bug 
squashing.  Just complaining about it gets neither of those done.

Cheers!

-C

-- 
Corey Shields - Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team
http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 11:47 am, Corey Shields wrote:
> On Friday 09 July 2004 11:06 am, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > Its becoming increasingly common place these days for program to sit in
> > ~x86 for a long time. I am curious why this is? Kde 3.2.3 is still in
> > testing. Whats taking so long? June 24  is a long time to test a
> > production ready application, as kde feels it is.
> > Whats going on over there?
>
> If I remember correctly, the KDE team is a 1-3 man team.  That's a hell of
> a package to be maintained and tested by just a few people.

I also noted that kde isn't the only problem here. I did state that it was 
increasing on many ebuilds, not just kde.

I have not seen anything on gentoo-user in a long time for it. Most, if not 
all, have upgraded to it already. 

I think your getting my intentions wrong here. I am not trying to be a prick 
and hurry you up. I am a avid gentoo following and want this distro to 
succeed. You, as a developer, need to realize that we are all here for one 
cause. I am here to find the problem.  And if I can be part of the solution, 
so be it.

Jeff

- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 			  Abolish mornings!
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA7s/0ld4MRA3gEwYRAgF9AJ9lWugAf/UFeQh4bBxPYQa+E8h7PQCgoFju
897614gBl9BU5g1dbidkV10=
=DYQ5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 11:52 am, Corey Shields wrote:

> I'm still missing your point here..?

The point is, ebuilds have been released for kde-3.2.3. They have been there 
since june 24. Nothing has changed in those ebuilds since. I have also noted 
that other ebuilds seem to follow this line on just sitting in ~x86 and never 
moving until a bug is filed to move said package over. Thats the point.

> I'm not sure what the situation with 3.2.3 is right now, but have you
> checked to see if there are outstanding (gentoo) bugs remaining?  If there
> are, then they should be resolved before the ~x86 flag is removed.  I am
> sure that Caleb would welcome any help that you could give him in testing
> and bug squashing.  Just complaining about it gets neither of those done.

Complaining? No, i am trying to find out the problem to hopefully help with a 
solution. 

Bugs.gentoo.org has yielded a few bugs. No show stoppers. The ones I read 
through have been user errors of some sort.

Please, correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks,
Jeff

- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 	    Go not to usenet for counsel, for it will say
	   both 'yes' and 'no' and 'try another newsgroup'.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA7tGUld4MRA3gEwYRApzKAKDQV0p9YZzGUrsl6cGPbvLn8jTD+wCeLxHS
ZGUGoZ/n2ok5crikatjPExw=
=YNgd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Caleb Tennis]

On Friday 09 July 2004 12:03 pm, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> I think your getting my intentions wrong here. I am not trying to be a
> prick and hurry you up. I am a avid gentoo following and want this distro
> to succeed. You, as a developer, need to realize that we are all here for
> one cause. I am here to find the problem.  And if I can be part of the
> solution, so be it.

Your concern is a valid one.  The simple fact is that we are short handed.   
This is true for all of Gentoo, not just KDE.   I've been spending my time 
the past few weeks testing 3.3.0_beta1, not running 3.2.3.  I've upgrade 
kdenetwork with the patched kopete since this time as well.   There's no main 
reason KDE has sat in ~x86 this long other than I simply haven't gotten 
around to bumping it.  The fact is that, with the way portage is structured 
and the commands you have to use to properly make the submittals, it takes me 
well over an hour to bump a version for KDE.  Considering the fact that it's 
volunteer time on my part, it gets put down on my priority list.

So, if you want to be part of the solution, start being proactive in helping 
to fix bugs and get ebuilds submitted.

It just so happens that the point you make gets made quite frequently, be it 
on a mailing list, in IRC or in bugs.g.o, and it gets to be a bit frustrating 
to have to try and explain over and over again.  I'm not upset or mad or 
anything at you, I understand where you're coming from with your post, but 
look at things the other way around: some of us developers have been doing 
this "volunteer" job for a long time now; it's a bit frustrating with someone 
comes along and basically throws out a "someone really should be more on top 
of this" attitude, which is what is perceived.

That said, there's absolutely no harm in kde sitting as ~x86 for 3.2.3.  It's 
still completely installable, and portage is configurable enough so as to not 
complain to you to downgrade.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[FRLinux]

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

On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 18:03, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> I think your getting my intentions wrong here. I am not trying to be a prick 
> and hurry you up. I am a avid gentoo following and want this distro to 
> succeed. You, as a developer, need to realize that we are all here for one 
> cause. I am here to find the problem.  And if I can be part of the solution, 
> so be it.

I don't think you're expressing your ideas in a good manner, as
suggested earlier, if you want ebuilds to be flagged as stable, help the
developers with it.

Steph
-- 
This mail was sent under Gentoo 2004.1 - Gnome & Kernel 2.6nptl
http://frlinux.net - Site d'aide aux Debutants sous Linux
Public key : http://frlinux.net/files/frlinux_public_key.asc

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 12:17 pm, Caleb Tennis wrote:
> Your concern is a valid one.  The simple fact is that we are short handed.
> This is true for all of Gentoo, not just KDE.   I've been spending my time
> the past few weeks testing 3.3.0_beta1, not running 3.2.3.  I've upgrade
> kdenetwork with the patched kopete since this time as well.   There's no
> main reason KDE has sat in ~x86 this long other than I simply haven't
> gotten around to bumping it.  The fact is that, with the way portage is
> structured and the commands you have to use to properly make the
> submittals, it takes me well over an hour to bump a version for KDE. 
> Considering the fact that it's volunteer time on my part, it gets put down
> on my priority list.

An hour to bump? That seems out of hand.  And no, I am not saying YOUR taking 
to long. :) The process itself

> So, if you want to be part of the solution, start being proactive in
> helping to fix bugs and get ebuilds submitted.

I am kinda laughing when I say this. I don't because I have seen ebuilds sit 
in bugs.g.o for months. No one wants to pick them up because they don't have 
time to maintain more. I got sysklogd-sql I would love to submit and 
maintain. I am afraid if will sit in bugs.gentoo.org though. 

> It just so happens that the point you make gets made quite frequently, be
> it on a mailing list, in IRC or in bugs.g.o, and it gets to be a bit
> frustrating to have to try and explain over and over again.  I'm not upset
> or mad or anything at you, I understand where you're coming from with your
> post, but look at things the other way around: some of us developers have
> been doing this "volunteer" job for a long time now; it's a bit frustrating
> with someone comes along and basically throws out a "someone really should
> be more on top of this" attitude, which is what is perceived.

Its not. Its a look into how this process can be quicker, yes, but I am here 
to help if I am needed. But just like you said, which is what I was afraid 
of, 3.2.3 is ready, its just not been done. 

I have seen on this list before, why not create some automated way of bumping 
ebuild that have sitting untouched for x number of days? You can still 
release it early if need be but it can help out on the forgotten or no time 
for ebuilds that sit?

> That said, there's absolutely no harm in kde sitting as ~x86 for 3.2.3. 
> It's still completely installable, and portage is configurable enough so as
> to not complain to you to downgrade.

But this becomes rather cumbersome having to do this all the time. Again, kde 
isn't the only one having this issue.

Jeff
- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 		 Have you hugged your volcano today?
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA7tdtld4MRA3gEwYRAozyAJ4qbZdwUQrBxnBlPvfMvRTQbfgyzACg6NFY
67p38ulNpW9ai/Cei+XKPfg=
=wbXs
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 12:31 pm, FRLinux wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 18:03, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > I think your getting my intentions wrong here. I am not trying to be a
> > prick and hurry you up. I am a avid gentoo following and want this distro
> > to succeed. You, as a developer, need to realize that we are all here for
> > one cause. I am here to find the problem.  And if I can be part of the
> > solution, so be it.
>
> I don't think you're expressing your ideas in a good manner, as
> suggested earlier, if you want ebuilds to be flagged as stable, help the
> developers with it.

How? bugs.gentoo.org doesn't have issues? I am not a developer so I don't have 
commit access. What else do *I* have to do?

- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 	   One tequila, two tequila, three tequila, floor.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA7thXld4MRA3gEwYRApwcAKCloQb2TMyjoGi/9yja+ZAUYo7FxQCgiDGO
R74Nq4wGBgIvqZSB+jAET9Y=
=QKbh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 535 bytes --]

On Fri, 9 Jul 2004 12:35:41 -0500 Jeff Smelser <tradergt@smelser.org>
wrote:
| I have seen on this list before, why not create some automated way of
| bumping ebuild that have sitting untouched for x number of days? You
| can still release it early if need be but it can help out on the
| forgotten or no time for ebuilds that sit?

Because then you'd all end up with gcc 3.4.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Sparc, MIPS, Vim, Fluxbox)
Mail            : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web             : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Stephen Becker]

> An hour to bump? That seems out of hand.  And no, I am not saying YOUR taking 
> to long. :) The process itself

At least an hour, if not more.  The problem is that not only do the kde
packages need to be stable, but that all packages that kde can possibly
depend on need to be stable also.  And deps of the packages that kde
depend on need to be stable...and the deps of those deps need to be
stable...etc.  It's not just a rule of thumb or anything...it's really
how it works.

> I have seen on this list before, why not create some automated way of bumping 
> ebuild that have sitting untouched for x number of days? You can still 
> release it early if need be but it can help out on the forgotten or no time 
> for ebuilds that sit?

I won't go back through the numerous reasons this is a horrible idea at
the moment.  Point is, this has been mentioned several times and it
always shot down in flames, for very good reasons.  Something like this
would be horrible for QA, especially on some non-x86 archs.

Steve (geoman)


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 12:41 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 9 Jul 2004 12:35:41 -0500 Jeff Smelser <tradergt@smelser.org>
>
> wrote:
> | I have seen on this list before, why not create some automated way of
> | bumping ebuild that have sitting untouched for x number of days? You
> | can still release it early if need be but it can help out on the
> | forgotten or no time for ebuilds that sit?
>
> Because then you'd all end up with gcc 3.4.

Of course, there would be ways to stop it from auto updating.

- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 		 Millennium hand and shrimp. Bugrit.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA7tvbld4MRA3gEwYRArIsAJ9HpdwwI+ANFxnJqrYJtv6CNqO0PACfXQSt
1C9U5SWePB/t6Y2QW/wekXk=
=ezcq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Alexander Gretencord]

On Friday 09 July 2004 19:17, Caleb Tennis wrote:
> I've been spending my time the past few weeks testing 3.3.0_beta1, not
> running 3.2.3.

Well someone on the kde team should, right? Or if you rely on user input, 
automatically push new versions from ~x86 to x86 when no user has complained 
(it's easier to complain than to state "everything works fine", especially 
when you don't use all of kde, I personally would never find a problem with 
kdegames as I don't install it). But I do use kdepim and if I find a problem 
with it I report it to the KDE bug system. However, I have not found any 
error that was the ebuilds fault. Should I file a bug stating "kdepim merged 
fine and seems to work ok a week after merging"?

> The fact is that, with the way portage is structured and the commands you
> have to use to properly make the submittals, it takes me well over an hour
> to bump a version for KDE.  

For getting it from ~x86 to x86? If that's really the case then perhaps this 
should open a wider discussion: a) Need more developers as most do have a 
real life besides gentoo or b) make it simpler!

> Considering the fact that it's volunteer time on my part, it gets put down
> on my priority list.

Then its the job of someone who does get paid to make it easier for the 
volunteers to get the job done, right?

> So, if you want to be part of the solution, start being proactive in
> helping to fix bugs and get ebuilds submitted.

The ebuild is almost always there when I want to upgrade a package it just 
sits in ~x86 ...

> and it gets to be a bit frustrating to have to try and explain over and over
> again. 

Have a standard reply to paste, also stating you just don't have the time to 
answer everyone personally. Its still better than saying nothing because 
you're overworked. In the time you explain this to all of those people you 
could move lots of packages to x86 :)

> That said, there's absolutely no harm in kde sitting as ~x86 for 3.2.3. 
> It's still completely installable, and portage is configurable enough so as
> to not complain to you to downgrade.

Yes there is harm in it. When I first see a package in ~x86 after the official 
release I think there might be a problem with it and don't merge it until I 
can't stand it any more and just merge it as I want to have a fix for all the 
bugs I reported for the last version of kde :)

Still, if I just edit the various files in /etc/portage/ I might at some time 
get a really unusable version of an ebuild which would not be the case if the 
build sat in ~x86 for a week or so before going to x86.

I really thought that an ebuild automatically went to x86 after some time of 
no complaints, until now...

All that being said, I do understand that you all have a real life, work and 
family to attend to. Maybe gentoo should get more developers and skip ~x86 
until they have :) I would really like to help besides reporting a bug or two 
once in a while, if it wasn't so much work. What good would I do when all I 
could spend was and hour or two every few days. Or a whole day once in a 
while and then nothing for a week?


Alex

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Peter Johanson]

On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 12:54:35PM -0500, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On Friday 09 July 2004 12:41 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Fri, 9 Jul 2004 12:35:41 -0500 Jeff Smelser <tradergt@smelser.org>
> >
> > wrote:
> > | I have seen on this list before, why not create some automated way of
> > | bumping ebuild that have sitting untouched for x number of days? You
> > | can still release it early if need be but it can help out on the
> > | forgotten or no time for ebuilds that sit?
> >
> > Because then you'd all end up with gcc 3.4.
> 
> Of course, there would be ways to stop it from auto updating.

yup. Don't do it in the first place. It's bad for QA, no two ways about
it.

-pete

> 
> - -- 
> =======================================================================
> Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
> Quote: 		 Millennium hand and shrimp. Bugrit.
> =======================================================================
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQFA7tvbld4MRA3gEwYRArIsAJ9HpdwwI+ANFxnJqrYJtv6CNqO0PACfXQSt
> 1C9U5SWePB/t6Y2QW/wekXk=
> =ezcq
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 

-- 
Peter Johanson
<latexer@gentoo.org>

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 12:45 pm, Stephen Becker wrote:
> At least an hour, if not more.  The problem is that not only do the kde
> packages need to be stable, but that all packages that kde can possibly
> depend on need to be stable also.  And deps of the packages that kde
> depend on need to be stable...and the deps of those deps need to be
> stable...etc.  It's not just a rule of thumb or anything...it's really
> how it works.

I know. They are.  This is not the issue at all. 

I feel some of you have no idea that I do realize all the dep issue and so 
forth that go into all this. I have thought ALL that through. 

I would have not said anything, if kde or any other app, was waiting on a 
dependincy.. Kaffeine is waiting for xine-libs. I realize it and have not 
said anything about it. Its been buggy as well.

Jeff
- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 	  Every snowflake in an avalanche pleads not guilty.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA7t3Pld4MRA3gEwYRAsIsAJ9U3eoxXcS6TK9Bz8TrK1capLlo+wCfYufS
eJ7kN5T1KC7uBugO3i8Lod8=
=ek57
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 01:00 pm, Peter Johanson wrote:
> yup. Don't do it in the first place. It's bad for QA, no two ways about
> it.

How does debian do it then? They have this model. 

Just askin.

- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 	  Man does not live by coffee alone. Have a danish!
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA7t3sld4MRA3gEwYRAiEvAJ0fdKSYAKcvC1vW31k5Y2vuuT80agCeOTvu
IWZVyLJ88hAHx3PCb4hakZY=
=mkKI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3501 bytes --]

On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 12:34, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > Is it 100% necessary to stay on the latest package?  Was there a
> > security vulnerability fixed by the new version?  If not, upgrading
> > simply because there is a newer version isn't always our top priority.
> > Often times, we are simply too busy to write a new ebuild, test the new
> > ebuild, and commit it for every version.  In many cases we are
> > understaffed, even with our enormous developer base.
> 
> You missed it. Both of these HAVE ebuilds.. Its just a matter of changing them 
> over to x86 from ~x86. Thats my point, how hard can this be? 

Well, editing the file and committing it to the tree is definitely the
easiest part.  Have you bothered looking for bugs related to these
ebuilds in bugzilla?  Perhaps there is something holding back the
ebuilds from being marked stable.  Putting *any* ebuild in the stable
tree has far-reaching implications, and we want to be very sure that it
has the least amount of errors possible.

> Yes, Kde sent out a maintance release, and kdenetwork has the fix for the 
> yahoo bug.
> 
> > You have to remember that many of us are volunteers and are unable to
> > spend a large amount of time on Gentoo.  We have jobs, families, and
> > other commitments than Gentoo.
> 
> Your right. Read above, the time was spend already creating the ebuilds.  AND, 
> new ebuilds are being created but nothing is being moved to x86. Thats my 
> issue. Not about when the ebuilds are created.

They get moved when the maintainers feel that they are tested enough. 
Your "issue" is that things aren't moving fast enough for your liking,
and I've told you how to solve it.  What you do from here is your
choice, but I can tell you that there's only one decision you can make
that'll affect Gentoo, and that is helping out.

> > With Gentoo, it really does hold true that if you want something done,
> > you should do it yourself.  Create ebuilds.  Post them to
> > bugs.gentoo.org.  If you think a package has been in testing too long,
> > report not only on your failures, but also on your successes.  Many
> > times packages will be delayed simply because there hasn't been enough
> > testing done, or the package simply gets forgotten about for a while.
> > We are a community-based distribution.  For things to get done quickly,
> > we *require* the help of the community.
> 
> Read above. And I do create ebuilds when I need them. And I have upgraded to 
> the new kde. That doesn't change the fact that its a pain to stay in x86 when 
> you manually have to upgrade things all the time since they sit in the ~x86 
> tree for months.. (in some cases)

Why are you in such a rush to upgrade?  I'm just curious.

If you find something that is working, report it.  Don't wait around
like a lump and then complain when we're not moving fast enough for your
tastes.

Most packages move to stable fairly quickly.  Things like
Gnome/KDE/X/GCC/glibc usually take longer simply because *MUCH* more
testing needs to go into them due to the impact on our users.

> And don't give me emails about moving up to ~x86. Why have the two versions 
> for a reason. if we are all gonna sit in ~x86, then why even go have it.

I wouldn't suggest moving up to ~arch, at all.  I would suggest either
having some patience, or helping out.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 939 bytes --]

On Fri, 9 Jul 2004 13:02:55 -0500 Jeff Smelser <tradergt@smelser.org>
wrote:
| On Friday 09 July 2004 12:45 pm, Stephen Becker wrote:
| > At least an hour, if not more.  The problem is that not only do the
| > kde packages need to be stable, but that all packages that kde can
| > possibly depend on need to be stable also.  And deps of the packages
| > that kde depend on need to be stable...and the deps of those deps
| > need to be stable...etc.  It's not just a rule of thumb or
| > anything...it's really how it works.
| 
| I know. They are.  This is not the issue at all. 
| 
| I feel some of you have no idea that I do realize all the dep issue
| and so forth that go into all this. I have thought ALL that through. 

Do you have any idea just how frickin' slow repoman is?

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Sparc, MIPS, Vim, Fluxbox)
Mail            : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web             : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Caleb Tennis]

> On Friday 09 July 2004 19:17, Caleb Tennis wrote:
>> I've been spending my time the past few weeks testing 3.3.0_beta1, not
>> running 3.2.3.
>
> Well someone on the kde team should, right? Or if you rely on user input,

Perhaps, but the kde herd = 3 people, and the other two are hesitant to
touch the core kde stuff as they still feel relatively "new" and don't
want to break things for users.


> For getting it from ~x86 to x86? If that's really the case then perhaps
> this
> should open a wider discussion: a) Need more developers as most do have a
> real life besides gentoo or b) make it simpler!

Perhaps it could be simpler, but it's a matter of manually editing the
ebuild, editing a changelog, scanning for problems, and submitting the
changes.  This process takes a few minutes.  Multiply that over the # of
packages in kde-base, and you get the idea.


> Then its the job of someone who does get paid to make it easier for the
> volunteers to get the job done, right?

AFAIK all of the Gentoo developers are doing this as volunteers.  If
someone's making money on it, it's news to me.

> The ebuild is almost always there when I want to upgrade a package it just
> sits in ~x86 ...


> Yes there is harm in it. When I first see a package in ~x86 after the
> official
> release I think there might be a problem with it and don't merge it until
> I
> can't stand it any more and just merge it as I want to have a fix for all
> the
> bugs I reported for the last version of kde :)

So it's a greed thing?  Every package I commit goes to ~x86 after an
official release - then it will later transition to x86.

> Still, if I just edit the various files in /etc/portage/ I might at some
> time
> get a really unusable version of an ebuild which would not be the case if
> the
> build sat in ~x86 for a week or so before going to x86.

Perhaps.  I'm usually on top of this for KDE, but as I said I've been at
this with Gentoo for almost a year and a half now and it's not easy being
prompt all of the time.  I think you'll find that I get kde versions in
portage within 24 hours of them being released - usually after significant
testing on my home machine.  Look in the desktop forums at people "asking"
me where the KDE ebuilds were for 3.3.0_beta1 like 30 minutes after it was
released to the public.


> I really thought that an ebuild automatically went to x86 after some time
> of
> no complaints, until now...

> All that being said, I do understand that you all have a real life, work
> and
> family to attend to. Maybe gentoo should get more developers and skip ~x86
> until they have :) I would really like to help besides reporting a bug or
> two
> once in a while, if it wasn't so much work. What good would I do when all

Yes we need more developers, but most people have that "I just don't have
time excuse".

> I
> could spend was and hour or two every few days. Or a whole day once in a
> while and then nothing for a week?

I would venture to say that is acceptable.  What's more important is
someone who's willing to stick around for a good period of time.  This is
hard stuff, and it requires learning and dedication.



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 695 bytes --]

On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 13:10, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> The point is, ebuilds have been released for kde-3.2.3. They have been there 
> since june 24. Nothing has changed in those ebuilds since. I have also noted 
> that other ebuilds seem to follow this line on just sitting in ~x86 and never 
> moving until a bug is filed to move said package over. Thats the point.

Jesus, man... June 24th?!  Call out the National Guard!

That is still *way* below our "standard" of not moving a package to
stable until after 30 days to ensure that no show-stopper bugs creep up.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Kurt Lieber]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1319 bytes --]

On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:06:23AM -0500 or thereabouts, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> Whats going on over there?

You really shouldn't have included this line as it comes across as very
rude.  (Not saying you intended it that way -- just that it came across
that way)

The thing is, there is no "over there".  There is only "here".  Gentoo is a
community distribution.  This means that our userbase is responsible for
maintaining it.  I am, and have always been, a Gentoo user, first and
foremost.  I didn't like some of the things that were happening with Gentoo
at the time, so I volunteered to help fix them.  That doesn't mean I'm no
longer a Gentoo user -- it simply means I'm a more active participant than
some other users.

If you don't like the speed at which certain packages are being updated,
become part of the solution.  Help out with fixing bugs, do testing of ~x86
packages (or whatever your arch is) and post reports on bugzilla for
packages that you find to be stable.  Write up documentation.  Do any of
the 10,000 things that need to be done to further the distribution.  

Gentoo is a meritocracy.  The folks who demonstrate competence, dedication
and a willingness to participate receive more of a voice in the future of
the distribution (by way of CVS access, etc.).  

--kurt

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 01:16 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Well, editing the file and committing it to the tree is definitely the
> easiest part.  Have you bothered looking for bugs related to these
> ebuilds in bugzilla?  Perhaps there is something holding back the
> ebuilds from being marked stable.  Putting *any* ebuild in the stable
> tree has far-reaching implications, and we want to be very sure that it
> has the least amount of errors possible.

There is no damn bugs. Celeb even said so. You need to read this thread, I am 
already tired of replying about going to bugzilla.

> They get moved when the maintainers feel that they are tested enough.
> Your "issue" is that things aren't moving fast enough for your liking,
> and I've told you how to solve it.  What you do from here is your
> choice, but I can tell you that there's only one decision you can make
> that'll affect Gentoo, and that is helping out.

RIGHT! And there is nothing in THIS case to do, other than to move it. SO, how 
can I move it? I can't, your gonna say. Thats were YOU GUYS come along..

> Why are you in such a rush to upgrade?  I'm just curious.

Oh, various kde bugs. I can't connect to yahoo in the old one.. Read the 
upgrade list. Its lengthy. 

> If you find something that is working, report it.  Don't wait around
> like a lump and then complain when we're not moving fast enough for your
> tastes.

Lol, Ok.. Now we are submitting bugs, that there are no bugs. I just read 
spider's email about un needed bugs submissions. Which one should I follow 
here?

> Most packages move to stable fairly quickly.  Things like
> Gnome/KDE/X/GCC/glibc usually take longer simply because *MUCH* more
> testing needs to go into them due to the impact on our users.

Right, I am fully aware. Going back, nothing is in bugzilla other then user 
errors. Celebs got them on the right track and fixed from what I saw.

> > And don't give me emails about moving up to ~x86. Why have the two
> > versions for a reason. if we are all gonna sit in ~x86, then why even go
> > have it.
>
> I wouldn't suggest moving up to ~arch, at all.  I would suggest either
> having some patience, or helping out.

Right.. Good answer. Patience.. 

- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 			Have an adequate day.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA7uaCld4MRA3gEwYRAsKzAJ0Wir1g7qCRZiYqCHv8XJ/NEAr5ogCfXvSr
o8EC5FNELBWiRjsUdQVGw3I=
=HhNC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 01:17 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> wrote:
> | On Friday 09 July 2004 12:45 pm, Stephen Becker wrote:
> | > At least an hour, if not more.  The problem is that not only do the
> | > kde packages need to be stable, but that all packages that kde can
> | > possibly depend on need to be stable also.  And deps of the packages
> | > that kde depend on need to be stable...and the deps of those deps
> | > need to be stable...etc.  It's not just a rule of thumb or
> | > anything...it's really how it works.
> |
> | I know. They are.  This is not the issue at all.
> |
> | I feel some of you have no idea that I do realize all the dep issue
> | and so forth that go into all this. I have thought ALL that through.
>
> Do you have any idea just how frickin' slow repoman is?

No, and? I am not sure how this has to do with me knowing there are no 
dependency issue's, please clarify.

- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 			 A DesiLu production.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA7ubdld4MRA3gEwYRAkLtAJwMofOwePL2B5umfb7b6fON3iZ2qACggkEC
UDI24DkabQB2SjrxRZc3jmA=
=+dkG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Alexander Gretencord]

On Friday 09 July 2004 20:21, Caleb Tennis wrote:
> Perhaps, but the kde herd = 3 people, and the other two are hesitant to
> touch the core kde stuff as they still feel relatively "new" and don't
> want to break things for users.

Well I do run stable kde all the time and I run the latest stable version. 
Once in the good old kde 2 times I even stayed with CVS HEAD for quite some 
time, updating every few weeks or so because I wanted all those IMAP 
features. That might be a 'yes' to your greed hypothesis :)

> but it's a matter of manually editing the ebuild, editing a changelog,
> scanning for problems, and submitting the changes.  This process takes a few
> minutes.  Multiply that over the # of packages in kde-base, and you get the
> idea. 

Well I don't see a way to help to speed this up short of having a script to 
mass ~x86->x86 and put a new changelog entry for it for a list of packages.

> AFAIK all of the Gentoo developers are doing this as volunteers.  If
> someone's making money on it, it's news to me.

Oh well then I miunderstood some other posting in this thread.

> I think you'll find that I get kde versions in portage within 24 hours of
> them being released - usually after significant testing on my home machine. 

As said there was no single time there was no ebuild in ~x86.

> Look in the desktop forums at people "asking" me where the KDE ebuilds were
> for 3.3.0_beta1 like 30 minutes after it was released to the public.

Those are morons. Have a userbase sitting in the USA and the maintainer in 
europe or vice versa and people will complain about this. Don't listen :)

> Yes we need more developers, but most people have that "I just don't have
> time excuse".

Uh oh. *duck*

> I would venture to say that is acceptable.  What's more important is
> someone who's willing to stick around for a good period of time.  This is
> hard stuff, and it requires learning and dedication.

I would be willing to stick around but I can't promise how much time I could 
give. Exams are coming near, we have a software project running and I should 
have begun writing the bachelor thesis weeks ago. Well maybe I could help out 
gentoo instead of searching for other excuses not to do my university 
stuff :)


Alex

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Stephen P. Becker]

Jeff Smelser wrote:

>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA1
>
>On Friday 09 July 2004 01:17 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>  
>
>>wrote:
>>| On Friday 09 July 2004 12:45 pm, Stephen Becker wrote:
>>| > At least an hour, if not more.  The problem is that not only do the
>>| > kde packages need to be stable, but that all packages that kde can
>>| > possibly depend on need to be stable also.  And deps of the packages
>>| > that kde depend on need to be stable...and the deps of those deps
>>| > need to be stable...etc.  It's not just a rule of thumb or
>>| > anything...it's really how it works.
>>|
>>| I know. They are.  This is not the issue at all.
>>|
>>| I feel some of you have no idea that I do realize all the dep issue
>>| and so forth that go into all this. I have thought ALL that through.
>>
>>Do you have any idea just how frickin' slow repoman is?
>>    
>>
>
>No, and? I am not sure how this has to do with me knowing there are no 
>dependency issue's, please clarify.
>
>  
>
Repoman has to scan the *entire* portage tree each time you run it.  
Multiply that by who knows how many total deps of kde there can possibly 
be, and the time adds up.  So, your knowledge of the number of deps 
doesn't mean jack until you realize how long repoman takes.  That's not 
even counting the number of times you re-run it just to double check you 
didn't make a mistake.  It's a long process.

Steve

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 346 bytes --]

On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 13:54, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > Because then you'd all end up with gcc 3.4.
> 
> Of course, there would be ways to stop it from auto updating.

...and you would end up right back where we are now.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4763 bytes --]

On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 13:56, Alexander Gretencord wrote:
> Well someone on the kde team should, right? Or if you rely on user input, 
> automatically push new versions from ~x86 to x86 when no user has complained 
> (it's easier to complain than to state "everything works fine", especially 
> when you don't use all of kde, I personally would never find a problem with 
> kdegames as I don't install it). But I do use kdepim and if I find a problem 
> with it I report it to the KDE bug system. However, I have not found any 
> error that was the ebuilds fault. Should I file a bug stating "kdepim merged 
> fine and seems to work ok a week after merging"?

A week is fine... a month is better.

> > The fact is that, with the way portage is structured and the commands you
> > have to use to properly make the submittals, it takes me well over an hour
> > to bump a version for KDE.  
> 
> For getting it from ~x86 to x86? If that's really the case then perhaps this 
> should open a wider discussion: a) Need more developers as most do have a 
> real life besides gentoo or b) make it simpler!

Considering KDE has many dependencies, *and* many things that depend on
it, I don't see how it could be made any simpler.  More developers are
definitely needed, not only on the KDE team, but on most of them.

> > Considering the fact that it's volunteer time on my part, it gets put down
> > on my priority list.
> 
> Then its the job of someone who does get paid to make it easier for the 
> volunteers to get the job done, right?

Nobody at Gentoo gets paid to work for Gentoo.

> > So, if you want to be part of the solution, start being proactive in
> > helping to fix bugs and get ebuilds submitted.
> 
> The ebuild is almost always there when I want to upgrade a package it just 
> sits in ~x86 ...

package.unmask and package.keywords are your friends.  Learn them!  Use
them!  Love them!

> > and it gets to be a bit frustrating to have to try and explain over and over
> > again. 
> 
> Have a standard reply to paste, also stating you just don't have the time to 
> answer everyone personally. Its still better than saying nothing because 
> you're overworked. In the time you explain this to all of those people you 
> could move lots of packages to x86 :)

I'm sure he isn't wasting that much time replying... ;]

This tends to come up about every 3 months or so.  Perhaps we should
just all bookmark this thread on gmane and next time it comes up, simply
paste them the URL and end the discussion right there.

> > That said, there's absolutely no harm in kde sitting as ~x86 for 3.2.3. 
> > It's still completely installable, and portage is configurable enough so as
> > to not complain to you to downgrade.
> 
> Yes there is harm in it. When I first see a package in ~x86 after the official 
> release I think there might be a problem with it and don't merge it until I 
> can't stand it any more and just merge it as I want to have a fix for all the 
> bugs I reported for the last version of kde :)
> 
> Still, if I just edit the various files in /etc/portage/ I might at some time 
> get a really unusable version of an ebuild which would not be the case if the 
> build sat in ~x86 for a week or so before going to x86.

No ebuild should ever move to stable after a week.  The "Gentoo
standard" is 30 days.

> I really thought that an ebuild automatically went to x86 after some time of 
> no complaints, until now...

Definitely not.  What system would possibly be able to know if there
were complaints?  Would we have it parse bugzilla? #gentoo? gentoo-user?

How about the forums?

> All that being said, I do understand that you all have a real life, work and 
> family to attend to. Maybe gentoo should get more developers and skip ~x86 
> until they have :) I would really like to help besides reporting a bug or two 
> once in a while, if it wasn't so much work. What good would I do when all I 
> could spend was and hour or two every few days. Or a whole day once in a 
> while and then nothing for a week?

Honestly, if you think ~x86 should be skipped, then perhaps you should
be running it, instead.  After all, you seem more than willing to help
with "testing" which is exactly what the ~arch KEYWORDS are all about. 
We don't put things that we know are broken into the tree.  Not as
~arch, and not as stable.

Funny enough, your "free time" to help out is about the same as most
Gentoo developers.  Remember that absolutely *none* of us is paid and we
all have jobs/school/families to attend to other than Gentoo.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 09 July 2004 02:47 pm, Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> Repoman has to scan the *entire* portage tree each time you run it.
> Multiply that by who knows how many total deps of kde there can possibly
> be, and the time adds up.  So, your knowledge of the number of deps
> doesn't mean jack until you realize how long repoman takes.  That's not
> even counting the number of times you re-run it just to double check you
> didn't make a mistake.  It's a long process.

mr bones can probably give the most accurate time but we're talking on a scale 
of hours for every run
also, while repoman runs, your cpu hits 100% utilization and you're unable to 
do portage related activities (it'll probably screw up the run of repoman)
-mike

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Mike Frysinger]

On Friday 09 July 2004 02:21 pm, Caleb Tennis wrote:
> > Then its the job of someone who does get paid to make it easier for the
> > volunteers to get the job done, right?
>
> AFAIK all of the Gentoo developers are doing this as volunteers.  If
> someone's making money on it, it's news to me.

drobbins was the only one who was 'paid' to do Gentoo (rightfully so), and 
since he has retired, no one gets 'paid' anymore ...
funds go to support infrastructure and all that fun stuff
-mike

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 636 bytes --]

On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 14:41, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> No, and? I am not sure how this has to do with me knowing there are no 
> dependency issue's, please clarify.

Go change an ebuild or three in one of the KDE packages... then run
"repoman scan" from that directory.  That is the time just for the
scan.  The commit stage takes even longer, since it runs the scan, then
does the commit.  Plus there are back-end scans for many things on the
CVS server itself, things like a Manifest.  These all take time.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Terje Kvernes]

Jeff Smelser <tradergt@smelser.org> writes:

  [ on auto-updating packages into a "stable" branch ]

> How does debian do it then? They have this model. 

  uhm.  what versions of applications do you find in Debians stable
  branch?  what version of GCC and KDE do you get?

-- 
Terje

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4824 bytes --]

On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 14:40, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> On Friday 09 July 2004 01:16 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> > Well, editing the file and committing it to the tree is definitely the
> > easiest part.  Have you bothered looking for bugs related to these
> > ebuilds in bugzilla?  Perhaps there is something holding back the
> > ebuilds from being marked stable.  Putting *any* ebuild in the stable
> > tree has far-reaching implications, and we want to be very sure that it
> > has the least amount of errors possible.
> 
> There is no damn bugs. Celeb even said so. You need to read this thread, I am 
> already tired of replying about going to bugzilla.

YET.  We're still on day 15.  There are 15 more to go.  Perhaps that
killer bug will be entered tonight, perhaps on day 29.  If you're
getting tired of reading about going to bugzilla, then perhaps you
should go.  Come back in 15 days if it hasn't been done.  Actually,
better yet, lose the attitude which is getting you NOWHERE and come back
to BUGZILLA after those 15 days.

> > They get moved when the maintainers feel that they are tested enough.
> > Your "issue" is that things aren't moving fast enough for your liking,
> > and I've told you how to solve it.  What you do from here is your
> > choice, but I can tell you that there's only one decision you can make
> > that'll affect Gentoo, and that is helping out.
> 
> RIGHT! And there is nothing in THIS case to do, other than to move it. SO, how 
> can I move it? I can't, your gonna say. Thats were YOU GUYS come along..

No, that is where the KDE team comes along.  The rest of us have nothing
to do with KDE, as it is not our expertise and we are not aware of the
issues with it.  Hence me responding without knowing every last detail
of this particular instance.

What I *do* know about is your attitude has been from the very beginning
very terse and rude.  Quite frankly, that is not the way to go about
getting your way.

> > Why are you in such a rush to upgrade?  I'm just curious.
> 
> Oh, various kde bugs. I can't connect to yahoo in the old one.. Read the 
> upgrade list. Its lengthy. 

Great.  I'm sure 15 days won't kill you.

> > If you find something that is working, report it.  Don't wait around
> > like a lump and then complain when we're not moving fast enough for your
> > tastes.
> 
> Lol, Ok.. Now we are submitting bugs, that there are no bugs. I just read 
> spider's email about un needed bugs submissions. Which one should I follow 
> here?

Spider didn't bother to mention that he has been on hiatus for a while,
so him having a TON of bug emails would be expected.

Now, what I am saying is that you should file emails, but NOT BEFORE 30
DAYS of the ebuild being in testing.

> > Most packages move to stable fairly quickly.  Things like
> > Gnome/KDE/X/GCC/glibc usually take longer simply because *MUCH* more
> > testing needs to go into them due to the impact on our users.
> 
> Right, I am fully aware. Going back, nothing is in bugzilla other then user 
> errors. Celebs got them on the right track and fixed from what I saw.

All in all, it is Caleb's call, but the rule of thumb is 30 days.  Being
as pushy as you have been throughout this thread shows that you have no
respect for the development staff and are simply self-centered.  Thank
you for showing your true colors on this issue.  I hope for the sake of
not having to listen to you whine anymore that Caleb finds some time to
bump KDE in the near future for you.

> > I wouldn't suggest moving up to ~arch, at all.  I would suggest either
> > having some patience, or helping out.
> 
> Right.. Good answer. Patience.. 

It definitely seems to be something that you're lacking.

Perhaps this will help you:

Patience Pa"tience, n. F. patience, fr. L. patientia. See
   Patient.
   1. The state or quality of being patient; the power of
      suffering with fortitude; uncomplaining endurance of evils
      or wrongs, as toil, pain, poverty, insult, oppression,
      calamity, etc.

            Strenthened with all might, . . . unto all patience
            and long-suffering.                   --Col. i. 11.

            I must have patience to endure the load. --Shak.

            Who hath learned lowliness From his Lord's cradle,
            patience from his cross.              --Keble.

   2. The act or power of calmly or contentedly waiting for
      something due or hoped for; forbearance.

            Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all.
                                                  --Matt. xviii.
                                                  29.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Phil Richards]

On 2004-07-09, FRLinux <frlinux@frlinux.net> wrote:
>  On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 18:03, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > I think your getting my intentions wrong here. I am not trying to be a
> > prick and hurry you up. I am a avid gentoo following and want this distro
> > to succeed. You, as a developer, need to realize that we are all here
> > for one cause. I am here to find the problem.  And if I can be part of
> > the solution, so be it.
> 
>  I don't think you're expressing your ideas in a good manner,

Possibly he isn't.  The points he raises are valid, though.

>  as suggested earlier, if you want ebuilds to be flagged as stable, help the
>  developers with it.

I think Jeff has already asked the same question, but I'll
ask it as well:  "How?"

I use ~x86 so I can get early visibility of things and try to
help out by logging bugs.  I also run gentoo-stats in the vague hope
that that will give some useful feedback.

BUT: If I have no problems, I'll raise no bugs.

So, how *precisely* do I, or anybody else, help the developers any further?
I don't have time outside of my fulltime job and family to become
a gentoo developer.  As far as I can see, I'm doing as much as I can.
And yet it appears that more is "needed".  Should I raise "bugs" saying
"works for me!"?  Somehow I think not.

phil
-- 
change name before "@" to "phil" for email


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Alexander Gretencord]

On Friday 09 July 2004 21:04, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> A week is fine... a month is better.
...
> package.unmask and package.keywords are your friends.  Learn them!  Use
> them!  Love them!

Well at least for kde and eclipse I already do this :)

> Perhaps we should just all bookmark this thread on gmane and next time it
> comes up, simply paste them the URL and end the discussion right there.

Sounds perfect to me!

> No ebuild should ever move to stable after a week.  The "Gentoo
> standard" is 30 days.

It definately should sometimes, as gentoo doesn't backport security fixes or 
does it now?

> Definitely not.  What system would possibly be able to know if there
> were complaints?  Would we have it parse bugzilla? #gentoo? gentoo-user?

By "automatically" I didn't mean a script or something but a dev doing it 
manually but after a 'defined' timeout. The question is indeed, how would you 
know. Well I'd vote for bugzilla. #gentoo/gentoo-user is for user problems 
isn't it? Bugzilla is the bug tracking system and as I always say: Problems 
simply don't exist if they are not in the bug tracking system.

> How about the forums?

God forbid, no! Close those evil forums altogether. :) Maybe bug reporting 
should be made easier. The last change was a really great step in the right 
direction. I still think the first page has too many options for some 
people :)

One example: I was shocked that even one of our developers at work was 
overwhelmed by the sheer mass of options in a bugzilla query form page, when 
he saw it for the first time (I just set up the bug tracking system). I'm 
used to it and could find nothing wrong with it, he closed his browser ...

> Honestly, if you think ~x86 should be skipped, then perhaps you should
> be running it, instead.

Maybe I should put smileys after every sentence and don't put them in places 
where I would put them normally so they get noticed :)

> We don't put things that we know are broken into the tree.  Not as
> ~arch, and not as stable.

Well of course those things slip in sometimes and I really have to have my 
system running (for university stuff) so I only use ~x86 for packages I want 
in that version. I normally don't upgrade any packages unless there is a 
security vulnerability or some features added/bugs fixed. So eclipse gets 
~x86 as well as kde but my 'emerge system -vp' gets fuller and fuller :)

> Funny enough, your "free time" to help out is about the same as most
> Gentoo developers.

Well then better get me something to help out with, right?


Alex

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2801 bytes --]

On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 15:38, Frank van de Pol wrote:
> i'm not out to piss you off or so, but I've this feeling I don't really
> understand the point you try to make regarding the repoman speed;
> 
> if I try it on my machine has always gave acceptable performance, even
> despite that the portage cvs tree is NFS mounted to an old P2 300MHz
> machine.
> 
> Are the times shown below comparable with yours or did I completely
> misunderstood you?

Those seem pretty accurate for a single package.  Though repoman is a
bit slower when running on a CVS repository.

Now, try running it on all of /usr/portage and see what kind of times
you get.  That is what Caleb is referring to.  Especially if a problem
is found and he has to fix it and start over.

> frank@centurion kdebase $ time repoman scan
> 
> We're not in PORTDIR... setting to: /home/frank/projects/gentoo/gentoo-x86
> 
> RepoMan scours the neighborhood...
> 
>   ebuild.badheader     6
>    kde-base/kdebase/kdebase-3.1.5.ebuild: Copyright header Error. Possibly date related.
>    kde-base/kdebase/kdebase-3.2.0.ebuild: Copyright header Error. Possibly date related.
>    kde-base/kdebase/kdebase-3.2.1.ebuild: Copyright header Error. Possibly date related.
>    kde-base/kdebase/kdebase-3.2.2.ebuild: Copyright header Error. Possibly date related.
>    kde-base/kdebase/kdebase-3.2.3.ebuild: Copyright header Error. Possibly date related.
>    kde-base/kdebase/kdebase-3.3.0_alpha1.ebuild: Copyright header Error. Possibly date related.
> 
> RepoMan sez: "You're only giving me a partial QA payment?
> I'll take it this time, but I'm not happy."
> 
> 
> real    0m4.606s
> user    0m2.615s
> sys     0m0.565s
> 
> 
> 
> frank@centurion kdegames $ time repoman scan
> 
> We're not in PORTDIR... setting to: /home/frank/projects/gentoo/gentoo-x86
> 
> RepoMan scours the neighborhood...
> 
>   ebuild.badheader     6
>    kde-base/kdegames/kdegames-3.1.5.ebuild: Copyright header Error. Possibly date related.
>    kde-base/kdegames/kdegames-3.2.0.ebuild: Copyright header Error. Possibly date related.
>    kde-base/kdegames/kdegames-3.2.1.ebuild: Copyright header Error. Possibly date related.
>    kde-base/kdegames/kdegames-3.2.2.ebuild: Copyright header Error. Possibly date related.
>    kde-base/kdegames/kdegames-3.2.3.ebuild: Copyright header Error. Possibly date related.
>    kde-base/kdegames/kdegames-3.3.0_alpha1.ebuild: Copyright header Error. Possibly date related.
> 
> RepoMan sez: "You're only giving me a partial QA payment?
> I'll take it this time, but I'm not happy."
> 
> 
> real    0m3.020s
> user    0m1.695s
> sys     0m0.291s

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a penguin?

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[George Shapovalov]

Just to add some sanity to this thread:

On Friday 09 July 2004 11:40, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> On Friday 09 July 2004 01:16 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> RIGHT! And there is nothing in THIS case to do, other than to move it. SO,
> how can I move it? I can't, your gonna say. Thats were YOU GUYS come
> along..

Jeff:
what you personally can do is:
echo "kde-base/kdelibs ~arch" >> /etc/portage/package.keywords"
(put your arch here)
and the such for all the needed kde packages and their dependencies ;).
Btw, just out of curiosity for the rest of us (that is not on kde herd) you 
may report how many lines you needed to add to that file if you will have the 
desire :).
Oh, and definitely report any problems you will encounter (if any) to 
bugs.gentoo.org

George



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Chris W]

Jeff Smelser wrote:
> There is no damn bugs. Celeb even said so. You need to read this thread, I am 
> already tired of replying about going to bugzilla.

I can't claim to know the ins and outs of these bugs, but at the time I
read this message:

53738   nor   	P2   	All   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
	kdegraphics-3.2.3 ebuild has compile errors
53832   blo   	P2   	x86   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
   	kdeaddons 3.2.3 fails to compile
53847 	blo 	P2 	x86 	kde@gentoo.org 		ASSI
	kdemultimedia 3.2.3 fails to build - issue in arts: synth...
54317   nor   	P2   	All   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
	KIconEdit in KDE 3.2.3 crashes due to broken ~/kde/share/...
54441  	maj   	P2   	x86   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
  	kde 3.2.3 has problem setting background image (i.e. wall...
55300   blo   	P2   	All   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
	kdebase 3.2.3 fails build in kate's doc directory.
55314  	nor   	P2   	All   	caleb@gentoo.org   	NEW
	cannot compile kdenetwork-3.2.3 (-> kget)

and these are just the ones that overtly mention 3.2.3.  Several are 
potential show stoppers if they live up to their titles.


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Ways for non devs to contribute (was KDE 3.2.3)

[Andrew Cowie]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2161 bytes --]

On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 18:37 +0000, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> become part of the solution ... for
> packages that you find to be stable.

Hyperbole aside, I think that this is Jeff's point: there is no obvious
or effective way for power users (ie people who have their shit together
who don't happen to be Gentoo developers) to do so.

If there happens to be a bug that was resolved, then certainly a "yup,
it's working now" comment to that bug is in order.

However, far more often, the case is: someone gets adventurous, tries
something in ~arch, and finds it works! There is, however, rarely a bug
out there about it to comment on. Certainly the sub-thread that Spider
raised suggests that raising new bugs to say "such and such, currently
~arch, works" is not what is wanted. An email to gentoo-dev is nice, but
I've never had a reply to any such success report I've sent, so perhaps
that is of dubious effectiveness.

So seriously: what is an enthusiast to do?

--

The best I can come up with is a contribution system similar to voting:

An infrastructure level change tied to Portage in which if someone
builds something that is ~arch and finds that it is stable, then an
email (gpg signed, perhaps, to avoid the usual spam issues?) gets fired
off (on command, after user has had time to consider things) to some
aggregator which keeps stats on ebuild versions. That way, a somewhat
objective sense of progress and stability can be built up on a per
ebuild (or perhaps, per version) basis.

There is a lot of potential for synergy here: emerge could report
stability scores; bugs in bugzilla could perhaps be tied to ebuilds more
directly, etc. But the real benefit, and the point of my email, is this:

Power users could get a positive sense of making a real contribution to
the forward progress of Gentoo, thus building up enthusiasm, rather than
wearing down their energy (and that of the devs!) as email threads such
as this one tend to do.

Regards,

AfC
Sydney

-- 
Andrew Frederick Cowie

OPERATIONAL DYNAMICS
Operations Consultants and Infrastructure Engineers

http://www.operationaldynamics.com/

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 08:05 pm, Chris W wrote:
> 53738   nor   	P2   	All   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
> 	kdegraphics-3.2.3 ebuild has compile errors
> 53832   blo   	P2   	x86   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
>    	kdeaddons 3.2.3 fails to compile
> 53847 	blo 	P2 	x86 	kde@gentoo.org 		ASSI
> 	kdemultimedia 3.2.3 fails to build - issue in arts: synth...
> 54317   nor   	P2   	All   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
> 	KIconEdit in KDE 3.2.3 crashes due to broken ~/kde/share/...
> 54441  	maj   	P2   	x86   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
>   	kde 3.2.3 has problem setting background image (i.e. wall...
> 55300   blo   	P2   	All   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
> 	kdebase 3.2.3 fails build in kate's doc directory.
> 55314  	nor   	P2   	All   	caleb@gentoo.org   	NEW
> 	cannot compile kdenetwork-3.2.3 (-> kget)
>
> and these are just the ones that overtly mention 3.2.3.  Several are
> potential show stoppers if they live up to their titles.

Read them, Celeb has already delt with them.

- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 	    ULTRA TOP SECRET MESSAGE, burn before reading!
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA72i3ld4MRA3gEwYRAiAOAKC758Qk7lvZ7jhn/CwOQ+982Nt05gCgt6RX
88g7KqY53LvaA5a+Bqkg/i0=
=sFEo
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 03:37 pm, George Shapovalov wrote:

> Jeff:
> what you personally can do is:
> echo "kde-base/kdelibs ~arch" >> /etc/portage/package.keywords"
> (put your arch here)
> and the such for all the needed kde packages and their dependencies ;).
> Btw, just out of curiosity for the rest of us (that is not on kde herd) you
> may report how many lines you needed to add to that file if you will have
> the desire :).
> Oh, and definitely report any problems you will encounter (if any) to
> bugs.gentoo.org

I suppose, why don't I enter ~x86, that will solve the problem to.. Matter of 
fact, Everyone should.. That way, everyone can at least run the latest 
software..

That doesn't solve the problem.

- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 	  I'm in a class by myself. Everyone else graduated.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA72j9ld4MRA3gEwYRAokLAJ4uavLiuyHWfR7CV2OAhzJSYZmseACbBJos
kTxasnBqeP18tKuQkEmjgdk=
=aB3y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ways for non devs to contribute (was KDE 3.2.3)

[Marius Mauch]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 862 bytes --]

On 07/10/04  Andrew Cowie wrote:

> The best I can come up with is a contribution system similar to
> voting:
> 
> An infrastructure level change tied to Portage in which if someone
> builds something that is ~arch and finds that it is stable, then an
> email (gpg signed, perhaps, to avoid the usual spam issues?) gets
> fired off (on command, after user has had time to consider things) to
> some aggregator which keeps stats on ebuild versions. That way, a
> somewhat objective sense of progress and stability can be built up on
> a per ebuild (or perhaps, per version) basis.

That's what gentoo-stats was/is about, not sure about the current status
though.

Marius

-- 
Public Key at http://www.genone.de/info/gpg-key.pub

In the beginning, there was nothing. And God said, 'Let there be
Light.' And there was still nothing, but you could see a bit better.

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 02:33 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote:

> YET.  We're still on day 15.  There are 15 more to go.  Perhaps that
> killer bug will be entered tonight, perhaps on day 29.  If you're
> getting tired of reading about going to bugzilla, then perhaps you
> should go.  Come back in 15 days if it hasn't been done.  Actually,
> better yet, lose the attitude which is getting you NOWHERE and come back
> to BUGZILLA after those 15 days.

its funny. I got a email from Celeb, the maintainer who disagree's. He should 
have it in, he just doesn't have time.. Why does he agree, but you do not?

> No, that is where the KDE team comes along.  The rest of us have nothing
> to do with KDE, as it is not our expertise and we are not aware of the
> issues with it.  Hence me responding without knowing every last detail
> of this particular instance.

> What I *do* know about is your attitude has been from the very beginning
> very terse and rude.  Quite frankly, that is not the way to go about
> getting your way.

My Attitude with you stems from your attitude.. It might be best if we, just 
stop right here as I see it as getting US no where. Celeb is replying and 
being at least honest about it. 

> Great.  I'm sure 15 days won't kill you.

Nope.. Again, I want to see this 30 day poiicy.. And I also want to know what 
this has to do with ebuilds out side kde, that are past 30 days.. Mysql, 
being one.

> Spider didn't bother to mention that he has been on hiatus for a while,
> so him having a TON of bug emails would be expected.

yeah, ok.. Nice reply. I have been on this list long enough to know he would 
have bitched about it a month ago, before his hiatus.. Righyfully so I might 
add.

> Now, what I am saying is that you should file emails, but NOT BEFORE 30
> DAYS of the ebuild being in testing.

Mysql?

> All in all, it is Caleb's call, but the rule of thumb is 30 days.  Being
> as pushy as you have been throughout this thread shows that you have no
> respect for the development staff and are simply self-centered.  Thank
> you for showing your true colors on this issue.  I hope for the sake of
> not having to listen to you whine anymore that Caleb finds some time to
> bump KDE in the near future for you.

Right, me and Celeb have astablished this.. I was in agreement with him, he 
doesn't have time.. Which is why this conversation with you, seems so 
ironic.. I am arguing with someone I have no need to even be talking to. 
Again, Celeb was very honest on why its not done. My reply, is, and will be, 
how can I help him get it in faster.. Not bitch about it like your thinking.

Jeff
- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 		     Moral failure (core dumped)
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA72q/ld4MRA3gEwYRApHhAJ0T7RKVIES8bocimslNur9AOUdHZQCZAZUj
mtC6s3LZUavDgFkCmICP9dQ=
=bYZW
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 01:37 pm, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 09, 2004 at 11:06:23AM -0500 or thereabouts, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > Whats going on over there?
>
> You really shouldn't have included this line as it comes across as very
> rude.  (Not saying you intended it that way -- just that it came across
> that way)

Abosoluty, re -reading it does come off that way, My sincere apologies.. My 
intention here is for a solution. If there can be.

> The thing is, there is no "over there".  There is only "here".  Gentoo is a
> community distribution.  This means that our userbase is responsible for
> maintaining it.  I am, and have always been, a Gentoo user, first and
> foremost.  I didn't like some of the things that were happening with Gentoo
> at the time, so I volunteered to help fix them.  That doesn't mean I'm no
> longer a Gentoo user -- it simply means I'm a more active participant than
> some other users.

right, and here I am, volunteering my time as well. I want to know what I can 
do.. Bugs are squashed, things should be progressing. KDe isn't joe program 
that you might wait 30 days, kde is tested well before its released from kde, 
why do we need to rerun the same tests? 

> If you don't like the speed at which certain packages are being updated,
> become part of the solution.  Help out with fixing bugs, do testing of ~x86
> packages (or whatever your arch is) and post reports on bugzilla for
> packages that you find to be stable.  Write up documentation.  Do any of
> the 10,000 things that need to be done to further the distribution.

And as I said before, Spider is on a prowl of uneeded bugs in bugzilla.. Stuff 
like this.. If he replies and says this is ok, so be it.

> Gentoo is a meritocracy.  The folks who demonstrate competence, dedication
> and a willingness to participate receive more of a voice in the future of
> the distribution (by way of CVS access, etc.).

Good.. Then my voice will continue to be heard. It always has, and always will 
be. Gentoo is the distrabution I choose for a reason, its the best..  And I 
will continue to make it so, by hook or by crook.. :)

Jeff.

- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 		Drink up, Socrates, it's all natural.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA72vmld4MRA3gEwYRAgz+AKClXtxri9GNq5LXfBif0cdNkeHmfwCguRxt
ht1PnS1WJJ/7jBtJhzejVEU=
=Oe6I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ways for non devs to contribute (was KDE 3.2.3)

[Jason Stubbs]

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

On Saturday 10 July 2004 12:36, Andrew Cowie wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-07-09 at 18:37 +0000, Kurt Lieber wrote:
> > become part of the solution ... for
> > packages that you find to be stable.

> So seriously: what is an enthusiast to do?

The Question ^^^

> The best I can come up with is a contribution system similar to voting:
>
> An infrastructure level change tied to Portage in which if someone
> builds something that is ~arch and finds that it is stable, then an
> email (gpg signed, perhaps, to avoid the usual spam issues?) gets fired
> off (on command, after user has had time to consider things) to some
> aggregator which keeps stats on ebuild versions. That way, a somewhat
> objective sense of progress and stability can be built up on a per
> ebuild (or perhaps, per version) basis.

The Answer ^^^

All you need to do now is to right up a GLEP that covers how it all works, 
bring it back for discussion to ensure that developers are happy to follow 
the detailed proposal and then provide some patches.

Regards,
Jason Stubbs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iQCVAwUBQO9tHloikN4/5jfsAQIBawQAj35Klb2LKPPhDQXHNlkF4QcF+g7n6Yi/
P7IFjcA6w3gDFVZqqH4yOKSWnCT2g0+Cx+bgbc4X8ot3Qcwx6ufo7DcmaE8DPDUz
i2J7Pop4vWlfWRnGGjbNe7Pc/WGflnYC57CydU0b7O7X9rptw+Icl6Q/A8uJDSw3
uGJErJkyx2s=
=6RpO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Friday 09 July 2004 01:47 pm, Stephen P. Becker wrote:

> Repoman has to scan the *entire* portage tree each time you run it.
> Multiply that by who knows how many total deps of kde there can possibly
> be, and the time adds up.  So, your knowledge of the number of deps
> doesn't mean jack until you realize how long repoman takes.  That's not
> even counting the number of times you re-run it just to double check you
> didn't make a mistake.  It's a long process.

Well, Thats because the ebuild system needs to be redone.. Thats for another 
topic on another day I would love to get involved with.. I know your just 
excited to hear that arn't you?

Sounds to me like we are having growing pains.. That also means there need to 
change. Gentoo, is a company now with users.. So your gonna have to change 
the way things work or its only going to get worse. Don't get mad at me 
because its slow, I didn't develop it, I can only help with the new way..

I wish you guys would stop fighting with me. All I am doing is trying to get 
gentoo leaner and meaner.. It needs it.. Your even telling me how repoman is 
horrible. That means, its time for a change. 

Thats how I see it.

Jeff
- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 	      If this were a tagline, it would go here.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA7233ld4MRA3gEwYRAgq5AJ4km0Qd37rgHb+ph3gYIon6LopiWgCfbe3e
uYIcTQ3uZJx4SqnQbKxHfLo=
=uh5F
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Bryan D. Stine]

On Saturday July 10, 2004 12:04 am, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> Nope.. Again, I want to see this 30 day poiicy.. And I also want to know
> what this has to do with ebuilds out side kde, that are past 30 days..
> Mysql, being one.
>
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/policy.xml#doc_chap4, the part about moving from 
~ARCH to ARCH. "An indication of the package's stability would be no verified 
or unresolved bug report for a month after the version's introduction." There 
may be other factors involved in stability, like dependencies and such.
-- 
Bryan D. Stine
<battousai@gentoo.org>

"Wade Boggs...goes down smooth."
 --Hank Aaron XXIV, 998 years from now

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Chris W]

Jeff Smelser wrote:
> Read them, Celeb has already delt with them.
> 

OK then, I'll do the research.

 >>>53738   nor   	P2   	All   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
 >>>	kdegraphics-3.2.3 ebuild has compile errors

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53738
Precisely no comments after the initial report.  Might be a problem, 
might not.

 >>>53832   blo   	P2   	x86   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
 >>>   	kdeaddons 3.2.3 fails to compile

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53832
Provides a manual fix to a problem.  The problem might be environmental, 
or it might be a build order dependency.   Is this what you want of a 
stable package?


 >>>53847 	blo 	P2 	x86 	kde@gentoo.org 		ASSI
 >>>	kdemultimedia 3.2.3 fails to build - issue in arts: synth...

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53847
Suggests manually merging arts-1.2.3 - shouldn't this be a DEPEND? 
Isn't this a problem with the ebuild that means it isn't stable-ready?

 >>>54317   nor   	P2   	All   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
 >>>	KIconEdit in KDE 3.2.3 crashes due to broken ~/kde/share/...

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=54317
Fair cop, others can't reproduce it.

 >>>54441  	maj   	P2   	x86   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
 >>>  	kde 3.2.3 has problem setting background image (i.e. wall...

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=54441
Hardly likely to stop the show, but no comment since reported.

 >>>55300   blo   	P2   	All   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
 >>>	kdebase 3.2.3 fails build in kate's doc directory.

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55300
Provides workaround that disables part of the build to avoid the 
problem.  Is this what you want of a stable package?

 >>>55314  	nor   	P2   	All   	caleb@gentoo.org   	NEW
 >>>	cannot compile kdenetwork-3.2.3 (-> kget)

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55314
Not commented on since it was reported.


So, we have a collection of NEW (not CLOSED, RESOLVED etc.) bugs overtly 
against KDE 3.2.3.   Some haven't been commented on since they were 
reported.  Others have been dealt with by manual workarounds that would 
not necessarily be acceptable of an ebuild marked stable.

To say that, "Celeb has already delt with them," is simply not accurate. 
   (I make no judgement on Caleb or the others that have commented).

Now, it's my turn to make a suggestion: lose the attitude and run KDE 
3.2.3 as-is (i.e. unstable) and provide feedback on the glitches so that 
confidence in stability is bolstered.   You could even help by clearing 
these bugs.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Saturday 10 July 2004 02:00 am, Chris W wrote:
>
>  >>>53738   nor   	P2   	All   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
>  >>>	kdegraphics-3.2.3 ebuild has compile errors
>
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53738
> Precisely no comments after the initial report.  Might be a problem,
> might not.

1 person.. Not reproducable..

>  >>>53832   blo   	P2   	x86   	kde@gentoo.org   	NEW
>  >>>   	kdeaddons 3.2.3 fails to compile
>
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=53832
> Provides a manual fix to a problem.  The problem might be environmental,
> or it might be a build order dependency.   Is this what you want of a
> stable package?

Might.. Key word. You don't know.. Celeb would, why don't you ask him?? Oh 
thats right, I did.. He told me kde 3.2.3 is ready for stable, he has just 
been too busy.. 

Sounds to be like he disagree's..

> So, we have a collection of NEW (not CLOSED, RESOLVED etc.) bugs overtly
> against KDE 3.2.3.   Some haven't been commented on since they were
> reported.  Others have been dealt with by manual workarounds that would
> not necessarily be acceptable of an ebuild marked stable.

No attitude.. Your just wrong here. Its not what I think, nor Celeb.

> To say that, "Celeb has already delt with them," is simply not accurate.
>    (I make no judgement on Caleb or the others that have commented).

Maybe so.. Maybe not.

> Now, it's my turn to make a suggestion: lose the attitude and run KDE
> 3.2.3 as-is (i.e. unstable) and provide feedback on the glitches so that
> confidence in stability is bolstered.   You could even help by clearing
> these bugs.

Your right.. Its moving into stable in 2 days max as I see it. This 30 day 
wait and all. 

Like I said.. you guys keep fighting with me. Its funny how Celeb agree's with 
me, And you guys don't. I respect he is to busy. I just asked how I could 
help.. 

Your also all going on and on about kde.. I said other packahes suffer the 
same fait. Well over 30 days..  I guess you guys just dont want to look into 
this. You just want to fight with me since your all right, and I am wrong. I 
was here to offer help in this situation, you wanted to argue and throw your 
weight around on how I seem to have no clue on how anything works around 
here. The 30 day wait period was the only thing I learned from this, other 
then most of the dev's want to argue symantecs, over having gentoo be a 
better distro.

Jeff
- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 	   The will to be stupid is a very powerful force.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA75xpld4MRA3gEwYRAiP4AKCRVImXQj4rSk0VhR/VhMbEeb21QgCfWofc
PMw+3RHNsK+Ec+SU7EMpL38=
=Rq21
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Robin H. Johnson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2276 bytes --]

On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 12:26:58AM -0400, Bryan D. Stine wrote:
> On Saturday July 10, 2004 12:04 am, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > Nope.. Again, I want to see this 30 day poiicy.. And I also want to know
> > what this has to do with ebuilds out side kde, that are past 30 days..
> > Mysql, being one.
> http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/policy.xml#doc_chap4, the part about moving from 
> ~ARCH to ARCH. "An indication of the package's stability would be no verified 
> or unresolved bug report for a month after the version's introduction." There 
> may be other factors involved in stability, like dependencies and such.
Furthermore:
"It is up to the maintainer of the package to deem which versions are
stable or if development versions should be in package.mask or left in
~arch."

As one of the maintainers of MySQL, amongst other things, my general
policy is that I'd consider the month in ~arch as a baseline, depending
BOTH the importance of the package, how much the package gets used, and
also the scope of changes between versions (I'm the kind of guy that
will read diffs between versions sometimes, to verify that bugs are
fixed).

As an example of the shorter times, there are some packages I maintain
where I am the upstream developer, and it was a tool I wrote for my own
daily usage that others find useful, and for those they usually languish
for only two weeks in ~arch, BECAUSE I use them heavily every work day.
Another example here is when I can see the diff is extremely tiny,
and non-invasive in every way possible, or fixes an important/major
bug in the last arch version.

On the opposite side, I keep some of the packages I maintain in ~arch
for a lot longer, because I'm not yet confident enough they are in a
stable enough state to inflict upon users of arch. MySQL is a prime
example of this, where 4.0.19 was partially a screwup upstream, with
a nasty bug that affected users of InnoDB in production (yes, it bit
me) so I wanted to be damn sure that 4.0.20 was an improvement over
4.0.18.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
E-Mail     : robbat2@orbis-terrarum.net
Home Page  : http://www.orbis-terrarum.net/?l=people.robbat2
ICQ#       : 30269588 or 41961639
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Alexander Gretencord]

On Saturday 10 July 2004 09:36, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> 1 person.. Not reproducable..

No comment after the report so your point is moot. If you have tested with the 
same gcc as the reporter and can't reproduce: comment on the bug!


Alex

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Alexander Gretencord]

On Saturday 10 July 2004 06:17, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> Gentoo, is a company now with users.

A 'company' that only has voluntary developers which do everythingin their 
free time.

> So your gonna have to change the way things work or its only going to get
> worse.

If you are talking about the 30 day period in ~arch, have you read the comment 
on mysql? That's exactly why you need that period or even longer. I guess 
you've heard about production environments? I consider my desktop one, as I 
use it for all my university work and I can't have it broken for days. Same 
with the nat box in the closet. For those that want the latest and greatest 
all the time: use ~arch!

That being said I'd love to always have the newest KDE and its unfortunate 
that Caleb just didn't have the time to move it.


Alex

P.S.: Could you stop using two dots at the end of a sentence? Or use three 
dots if you mean them.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Carsten Lohrke]

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

On Saturday 10 July 2004 06:09, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> right, and here I am, volunteering my time as well. I want to know what I
> can do.. Bugs are squashed, things should be progressing.
There are quite a few bugs open. The question is, if they will go in, before a 
KDE 3.2.3(-rX) will be marked stable.

> KDe isn't joe 
> program that you might wait 30 days, kde is tested well before its released
> from kde, why do we need to rerun the same tests?
Distro integration and ensuring stability is not the same as a stable - even 
bugfix - upstream release; Waiting 30 days is nothing in this context. If you 
don't want to wait, you are free to use the unstable ebuilds.

Caleb is doing kde-core stuff alone at the moment and had not much time lately 
as he told me. How loud will you cry, when someone who is maintaining your 
favorite bunch of ebuilds is in holidays for four weeks? Reading your emails 
I would think about extending the testing period for another 30 days.

0.02 € invested in fodder.


Carsten
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA79ZHVwbzmvGLSW8RAiFcAJ0V6CiPrs3zRfOig7PkTCfIEdGbJwCfaAWX
HkudobnmJ0pWpnh0B0gWGKE=
=gfgZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Ways for non devs to contribute (was KDE 3.2.3)

[Kurt Lieber]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 952 bytes --]

On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 01:36:24PM +1000 or thereabouts, Andrew Cowie wrote:
> Hyperbole aside, I think that this is Jeff's point: there is no obvious
> or effective way for power users (ie people who have their shit together
> who don't happen to be Gentoo developers) to do so.
[snip]
> So seriously: what is an enthusiast to do?

become a developer.  That's what the other ~200 of us did.

The word "developer" is a bad one as it has a narrow focus compared with
what all of us really do.  You don't have to speak C, python, perl or even
bash to be a valuable developer.  One of our core strengths as a
distribution is our documentation.  We *always* need more documentation
writers, especially for specialized projects.  

Then there's recruiting, infrastructure, security, etc. none of which
require a great deal of "development" in the traditional sense of the word.

Believe me, there's plenty of work to go around.

--kurt

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Saturday 10 July 2004 05:53 am, Alexander Gretencord wrote:
> On Saturday 10 July 2004 06:17, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > Gentoo, is a company now with users.
>
> A 'company' that only has voluntary developers which do everythingin their
> free time.

Right, no one is debating this. 

> If you are talking about the 30 day period in ~arch, have you read the
> comment on mysql? That's exactly why you need that period or even longer. I
> guess you've heard about production environments? I consider my desktop
> one, as I use it for all my university work and I can't have it broken for
> days. Same with the nat box in the closet. For those that want the latest
> and greatest all the time: use ~arch!

I am reading it now, yes. He also stated he will move it before 30 days 
because he uses it, and needs it.  So basically, what I am seeing, is if its 
important enough for the dev, then they forget the 30 day rule. If its not, 
they don't..

Which is getting me right were I thought I would be in this, the devs just 
basically do what they want. They follow the rules when they want to. 

Mysql is sitting for a good reason, which was my question in the beginning. 
Why is it sitting. He answered, but also stated he  moves them in if the 
changes are significant enough. But according to the policy sent to me, its 
only suppose to if its a security fix.  Which is why I am waiting for kde, 
because its not been 30 days, but does have a significant fix in it. just as 
the mysql developer stated he moved his in earlier for.

I don't know anymore.. Let the devs just do what they want.. 

> That being said I'd love to always have the newest KDE and its unfortunate
> that Caleb just didn't have the time to move it.

Funny thing is, if I had just got the reply from him, and none of this other 
crap, this wouldn't be the thread that it is...  I just wanted to know why 
some are taking so long. I wasn't aware of this 30 day rule before. I 
remember many ebuilds being there for only a few days, then being set stable 
many times in the past.. Mysql being one.

Oh well, you guys just do what you want.. This thread is going way past my 
intentions anymore. 

Jeff
- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 	  Before I go to bed, I want some filk and cookies.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA8AAyld4MRA3gEwYRAlx/AJ9ZB8BgvYu4NSOz8dVjbFMwJEIgnACgvyLf
py2r7CxsmA9jqc1oCw+LyCo=
=6cKV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 965 bytes --]

On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 09:41:54 -0500 Jeff Smelser <tradergt@smelser.org>
wrote:
| I am reading it now, yes. He also stated he will move it before 30
| days because he uses it, and needs it.  So basically, what I am
| seeing, is if its important enough for the dev, then they forget the
| 30 day rule. If its not, they don't..

No, we do what is appropriate for the package. As a guideline, thirty
days is a reasonable duration for ~arch for non-core packages. For very
small changes (for example a simple ten line patch), thirty days may be
too long. For core packages, or complex packages with a lot of
dependencies, thirty days is often not long enough to find all the
associated issues. For security related issues, we either backport or
ignore the thirty days depending upon which seems more appropriate.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Sparc, MIPS, Vim, Fluxbox)
Mail            : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web             : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Chris Gianelloni]

On Sat, 2004-07-10 at 10:41, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> I am reading it now, yes. He also stated he will move it before 30 days 
> because he uses it, and needs it.  So basically, what I am seeing, is if its 
> important enough for the dev, then they forget the 30 day rule. If its not, 
> they don't..

No.  He didn't say that he would move it before 30 days.  Read it
again.  He specifically said that he *isn't* moving MySQL until he is
*positive* that it does not have the same bugs as the previous version
did.

> Which is getting me right were I thought I would be in this, the devs just 
> basically do what they want. They follow the rules when they want to. 

...and devs that do this on a regular basis are dealt with by devrel. 
The rules are there for a reason.  However, you seem to misunderstand
the rules and are exploiting their wordings for your own personal
agendas.  Congratulations...

> Mysql is sitting for a good reason, which was my question in the beginning. 
> Why is it sitting. He answered, but also stated he  moves them in if the 
> changes are significant enough. But according to the policy sent to me, its 
> only suppose to if its a security fix.  Which is why I am waiting for kde, 
> because its not been 30 days, but does have a significant fix in it. just as 
> the mysql developer stated he moved his in earlier for.

No.  He said he moves them in if the changes are *insignificant*
enough.  Changes that are tiny bug fixes, or heck, even typo fixes are
quite common.  They're able to bypass the waiting period and go straight
to stable.

> I don't know anymore.. Let the devs just do what they want.. 

You seem to think we will anyway, so why are you bothering to even
continue this?

> > That being said I'd love to always have the newest KDE and its unfortunate
> > that Caleb just didn't have the time to move it.
> 
> Funny thing is, if I had just got the reply from him, and none of this other 
> crap, this wouldn't be the thread that it is...  I just wanted to know why 
> some are taking so long. I wasn't aware of this 30 day rule before. I 
> remember many ebuilds being there for only a few days, then being set stable 
> many times in the past.. Mysql being one.
> 
> Oh well, you guys just do what you want.. This thread is going way past my 
> intentions anymore. 

I'm glad the we have your approval.  I'll be sure to submit a story to
GWN this next week that you approve of our actions.

I know that you have met with some resistance, but quite frankly, it is
to be expected when all you do is come out and criticize those of us
that devote time and energy to Gentoo to make it better for everyone who
uses it.  If perhaps next time before you fly off the cuff and write an
email complaining about something, you were to think about a possible
solution, and maybe even research the "problem" that you're criticizing
so that you come across as being helpful and not being a complete
self-serving ass, you'll be better received.

Also, maybe you could have avoided this entire thing if you had simply
emailed kde@gentoo.org, seeing as how they're the maintainer.  Writing
emails to -dev complaining about something being stable is about as
useful as a bicycle to a fish.

As Kurt had said before, besides being a developer for Gentoo, primarily
I am a Gentoo user.  When I find a bug in an ebuild/package, I contact
the maintainers and file a bug.  I give them the same information I
would expect from any other user on a bug assigned to me.  I let them
make the decision on what to do because they are the maintainer, and
they know what is best for the package in question.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a pengiun?


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jason Stubbs]

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

Hi,

I've followed this whole thread and you seem to be saying that you don't 
understand why non-KDE devs replied and why it was taken so negatively. 
Therefore, I'll explain how your original email was perceived (at least to 
me) so that perhaps you can see the other side of the fence. I could do this 
for every email you've sent, but I hope that you'll do it yourself.

On Saturday 10 July 2004 01:06, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> Dev's,
>
> Its becoming increasingly common place these days for program to sit in
> ~x86 for a long time.

You've opened here addressing the entire developer-base of Gentoo. You've then 
gone on to say that we're all lazy.

> I am curious why this is?

This sounds like an honest question on its own, but sounds very sarcastic in 
the context of the previous statement.

> Kde 3.2.3 is still in testing. Whats taking so long?

Again, fairly innocent question but, even on its own, it has a very 
self-centered overtone. In the context of what you wrote previously, it's 
just a personal attack on Gentoo's KDE maintainer(s).

> June 24 is a long time to test a production ready application, as kde feels 
> it is. 

This shows that the package in question has been in testing for a total of 16 
days. This also shows that you haven't looked into what a dev's job is.

In the context of the whole thread, i think those five words "as kde feels it 
is" might have been the whole point of your email - "why aren't releases that 
upstream believe to be stable considered stable by Gentoo?" If you had of 
asked that providing the context of KDE 3.2.3 being tested for 16 days, I 
guarantee you would have got a better respone.

> There are other packages I have found I am having to force upgrading myself
> on these days just to get.

This has no merit what so ever to the question your asking or any point your 
trying to make and so just sounds like a whinge...

> mysql is still on 4.018, they are on 20 now. 

...and then you go on to make another personal attack on the mysql 
maintainer(s).

> Whats going on over there?
> Jeff

You then signoff by broadening your personal attack to include every Gentoo 
developer.

- -------

I hope you can understand why everybody got so negative toward you. If you 
look over your other emails in an objective manner, you'll find them littered 
with the same sorts of (from your viewpoint, mis-)interpretations as what 
I've outlined above. Especially if it's via email and especially if it is 
possibly a delicate topic, ask a question as tersely as possible so that it 
and only it is answered.

Regards,
Jason Stubbs
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iQCVAwUBQPAT7FoikN4/5jfsAQKjvQP/SHtUhAuH+ZCjr7yYukQEO+cPC/CCF1JU
x5Tx0ImvK5GrnAZvenlD/jADnGdshen66JYqg0zsVHM4mrV9TQufj7J89PR0FQO8
F2uIHB/mv+Upv6QVdOAA2xMdSN3ZHRMoLt/zPEqCnRzJwDS5u92vdkR4Gq+xV4/e
M+Zn7DQMxGE=
=7eT3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Carsten Lohrke]

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

On Saturday 10 July 2004 17:57, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Also, maybe you could have avoided this entire thing if you had simply
> emailed kde@gentoo.org, seeing as how they're the maintainer.
That's not necessarily a good idea. I'm getting so much spam via 
<herd>@gentoo.org, that all non-bugzilla emails go directly into /dev/null.


Carsten
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA8BXYVwbzmvGLSW8RAklCAKCcJ0wx1FADJmTg7gIwYD6YLs+02wCePepo
YE4bfjptPVvi1e2409GbezM=
=iVgn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Saturday 10 July 2004 10:57 am, Chris Gianelloni wrote:

[Deleted]

I got the answers I am looking for. The maintainers replied. Your just arguing 
now. Many dev's have brought up issues and met the same fait as me. 
Self-serving ass that I am an all..  

I am ready to stop our conversation at anytime.. So please, why don't we just 
agree to disagree and move on.

Jeff

- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 		  I'm not doing this JUST be weird.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA8Bcpld4MRA3gEwYRAsu8AJ0arBNSs6QkK2Agfswd2DBg1ki8WACgv+wf
H8psAMGcUnf7JXBVxIy1Q5k=
=Rawv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Stuart Herbert]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1912 bytes --]

On Saturday 10 July 2004 15:41, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> Which is getting me right were I thought I would be in this, the devs just
> basically do what they want. They follow the rules when they want to.

I can't find an official policy that says that a package must be moved from 
~arch after the thirty day period is complete.  To be honest, I can't find an 
official policy that says a package has to stay in ~arch for thirty days 
either.

> I don't know anymore.. Let the devs just do what they want..

We all do what we can manage in the time we have available.

If your expectations can't be met by Gentoo, there are plenty of commercial 
distributions out there who *do* have paid staff.  No-one's forcing you to 
use Gentoo at all ;-)

> Funny thing is, if I had just got the reply from him, and none of this
> other crap, this wouldn't be the thread that it is...  

You call it 'crap' ... we call it an education.  We're trying to help you.  If 
this isn't the sort of help you find useful, then Gentoo Linux is probably 
the wrong choice for you.

If you're going to use Gentoo, it's important that you have the right 
expectations about Gentoo Linux and the *very* hard working volunteers (devs 
and users alike) who give up their free time to contribute.

Yes, lots of things could be better.  Lord knows I'm quick to be vocal about 
that myself.  But to make things better takes manpower (and womanpower ;-) 
and people willing to roll their sleeves up and get involved.

Best regards,
Stu
-- 
Stuart Herbert                                              stuart@gentoo.org
Gentoo Developer                                       http://www.gentoo.org/
                                                   http://stu.gnqs.org/diary/

GnuPG key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu
Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319  C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C
--

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Saturday 10 July 2004 11:06 am, Jason Stubbs wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've followed this whole thread and you seem to be saying that you don't
> understand why non-KDE devs replied and why it was taken so negatively.
> Therefore, I'll explain how your original email was perceived (at least to
> me) so that perhaps you can see the other side of the fence. I could do
> this for every email you've sent, but I hope that you'll do it yourself.

Kurt and I want over this.

> On Saturday 10 July 2004 01:06, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > Dev's,
> >
> > Its becoming increasingly common place these days for program to sit in
> > ~x86 for a long time.
>
> You've opened here addressing the entire developer-base of Gentoo. You've
> then gone on to say that we're all lazy.

Correct, this was before I knew of the 30 day policy..  I am not the only one 
who see's it as this discussion has come up about every 3 months from what I 
have heard from other dev's. Your assuming I said your lazy, thats partially 
my fault for not being more clear, and yours for assuming.  I should have 
been more clear and they could have asked me to be more clear. Either way, I 
will try to be more clear next time. ;) I never once said you guys are lazy, 
I know your busy.

> > I am curious why this is?
>
> This sounds like an honest question on its own, but sounds very sarcastic
> in the context of the previous statement.

Emails are that way, its all left up for interpretation, if we were standing 
face to face, this wouldn't have been the blow up that it was.

> > Kde 3.2.3 is still in testing. Whats taking so long?
>
> Again, fairly innocent question but, even on its own, it has a very
> self-centered overtone. In the context of what you wrote previously, it's
> just a personal attack on Gentoo's KDE maintainer(s).

It wasn't.. June 10 kde was released. I was just wondering why its not in the 
stable tree yet, again, not knowing the 30 day "standard".

> > June 24 is a long time to test a production ready application, as kde
> > feels it is.
>
> This shows that the package in question has been in testing for a total of
> 16 days. This also shows that you haven't looked into what a dev's job is.

I was wrong, its June 10.. I read off the wrong date, my apologies for that.. 
its been roughly 30 days now. And I know what a dev's job is.

> In the context of the whole thread, i think those five words "as kde feels
> it is" might have been the whole point of your email - "why aren't releases
> that upstream believe to be stable considered stable by Gentoo?" If you had
> of asked that providing the context of KDE 3.2.3 being tested for 16 days,
> I guarantee you would have got a better respone.

your right.. I was wrong on that and I do admit it as I did with Kurt, it was 
poorly constructed. I apologized then, as I do now. My intentions were to see 
why kde hasn't been released, and help get it in faster, no matter what it 
was..  Again, not knowing this 30 day rule.. I didn't think there was 
considering some things are released early. 

Mysql too, kde has been picked on but I mentioned it too.

> > There are other packages I have found I am having to force upgrading
> > myself on these days just to get.
>
> This has no merit what so ever to the question your asking or any point
> your trying to make and so just sounds like a whinge...
>
> > mysql is still on 4.018, they are on 20 now.

> ...and then you go on to make another personal attack on the mysql
> maintainer(s).

Why is this all taken personal? If I maintained mysql, and this was asked, I 
would explain why its two versions behind.. I don't get this one..  

Maybe the context of the message, protrays this.

> > Whats going on over there?
> > Jeff
>
> You then signoff by broadening your personal attack to include every Gentoo
> developer.

Again, as I said with Kurt, this was uncalled for, I agree. and I apologized 
for it.

Like I said, I got off on the wrong foot, and I tried to explain my intentions 
over and over but everyone just want to tell me how wrong I am. instead of 
just shutting me up by proving that mysql shouldn't be released, and that kde 
isn't in its 30 day stage yet. Instead, I got told I was a self serving ass 
and so on. 

Again, I have been here a long time.. Most should know me by now as I help in 
gentoo-user all the time.. So i just didn't show up one day throwing my 
weight around.. I should have replaced that last line with I want to help get 
the release in, if possible.

Contrary to popular believe, I want gentoo to succeed. Kde is just as much of 
a problem for me, as it is for you in this issue. It takes time for you to 
send it out, and it takes time for me to get it installed if I want it early. 
I was looking for a solution that could help both of us now, and in the 
future. Thats all.

Jeff 
- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 	I will make spiritual bankruptcy my goal for the day.
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA8B7Lld4MRA3gEwYRAsgGAJ9i63tv9G0TTjXQUUZcd/RfWS8kmwCgm0jb
iH481ctcjD5EhDZrDJ/Wt6U=
=V8f3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Saturday 10 July 2004 11:21 am, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> On Saturday 10 July 2004 15:41, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > Which is getting me right were I thought I would be in this, the devs
> > just basically do what they want. They follow the rules when they want
> > to.
>
> I can't find an official policy that says that a package must be moved from
> ~arch after the thirty day period is complete.  To be honest, I can't find
> an official policy that says a package has to stay in ~arch for thirty days
> either.

Its there, someone sent it. Its just a standard. its not a concreate date. It 
will be released soon, is all I know.

> > I don't know anymore.. Let the devs just do what they want..
>
> We all do what we can manage in the time we have available.
>
> If your expectations can't be met by Gentoo, there are plenty of commercial
> distributions out there who *do* have paid staff.  No-one's forcing you to
> use Gentoo at all ;-)

Thats not what I said, nor implied.. I asked to help you guys get the release 
out, not you get this release out right now or else.

> > Funny thing is, if I had just got the reply from him, and none of this
> > other crap, this wouldn't be the thread that it is...
>
> You call it 'crap' ... we call it an education.  We're trying to help you. 
> If this isn't the sort of help you find useful, then Gentoo Linux is
> probably the wrong choice for you.

Some was educational, some others was just poking at me..

> If you're going to use Gentoo, it's important that you have the right
> expectations about Gentoo Linux and the *very* hard working volunteers
> (devs and users alike) who give up their free time to contribute.

I should, I have been here since the beginning.. Things have changed however. 

> Yes, lots of things could be better.  Lord knows I'm quick to be vocal
> about that myself.  But to make things better takes manpower (and
> womanpower ;-) and people willing to roll their sleeves up and get
> involved.

I said I was.. That was my point through all this. I say now, as I said 
before, kde 3.2.3 should be released. If Celeb told me right now, X bug is 
stopping it, I am on it.. Celeb, from what I interpreted, said 3.2.3 is 
ready, he has just been spending his time on 3.3 and been to busy. So my 
question is, how would I get 3.2.3 done for him? Can I? I will spend my time 
running repoman, I don't care.. 

Jeff
- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: Quelqu'un qui dit des choses intéressantes, on l'ecoute, même quand il
ne dit rien.				-- Philippe Geluck, Le Chat
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA8CDmld4MRA3gEwYRArvrAJ9EEY7AYc9XWFlihHCKrv83xFK1EgCdHMju
5ntEtkitTJsq+be67Rmv1tk=
=VIo1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] How can I help?

[Stuart Herbert]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 697 bytes --]

On Saturday 10 July 2004 18:01, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> So my question is, how would I get 3.2.3 done for him? Can I? I will 
> spend my time running repoman, I don't care..
>
> Jeff

That's a good question.  I don't know the answer myself.  Hopefully someone 
who does can answer it for you.

Best regards,
Stu
-- 
Stuart Herbert                                              stuart@gentoo.org
Gentoo Developer                                       http://www.gentoo.org/
                                                   http://stu.gnqs.org/diary/

GnuPG key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu
Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319  C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C
--

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jon Portnoy]

On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 09:41:54AM -0500, Jeff Smelser wrote:

> I am reading it now, yes. He also stated he will move it before 30 days 
> because he uses it, and needs it.  So basically, what I am seeing, is if its 
> important enough for the dev, then they forget the 30 day rule. If its not, 
> they don't..
> 
> Which is getting me right were I thought I would be in this, the devs just 
> basically do what they want. They follow the rules when they want to. 

No. The devs _do what's best for the userbase_. What a shocker!

I have no idea how you can interpret statements that boiled down to "I 
stabilize things based on a number of factors including code review and 
my level of familiarity with the codebase" as some kind of anarchy. It'd 
really be great if you could engage in productive discussion rather than 
constantly trying to find ways to snipe at the dev team. That's why this 
thread has been dragging on.

-- 
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jon Portnoy]

On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 05:21:41PM +0100, Stuart Herbert wrote:
> On Saturday 10 July 2004 15:41, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > Which is getting me right were I thought I would be in this, the devs just
> > basically do what they want. They follow the rules when they want to.
> 
> I can't find an official policy that says that a package must be moved from 
> ~arch after the thirty day period is complete.  To be honest, I can't find an 
> official policy that says a package has to stay in ~arch for thirty days 
> either.

It's not really something that should be in policy because it's not 
really a hard restriction. The package maintainer should use it as a 
guideline.

-- 
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Saturday 10 July 2004 12:08 pm, Jon Portnoy wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 09:41:54AM -0500, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > I am reading it now, yes. He also stated he will move it before 30 days
> > because he uses it, and needs it.  So basically, what I am seeing, is if
> > its important enough for the dev, then they forget the 30 day rule. If
> > its not, they don't..
> >
> > Which is getting me right were I thought I would be in this, the devs
> > just basically do what they want. They follow the rules when they want
> > to.
>
> No. The devs _do what's best for the userbase_. What a shocker!

I said it because I was told kde isn't even close to this 30 day window. I 
should not even be asking why kde isn't even released.  I feel kde should be 
released and was trying to figure out how to get it done.

> I have no idea how you can interpret statements that boiled down to "I
> stabilize things based on a number of factors including code review and
> my level of familiarity with the codebase" as some kind of anarchy. It'd
> really be great if you could engage in productive discussion rather than
> constantly trying to find ways to snipe at the dev team. That's why this
> thread has been dragging on.

because I was told kde isn't ready simply because its not 30 days.  your 
telling me now its just a guidline, which is what I thought in the 
beginning..

Its come back full circle.

Like I have said, over and over.. How can I get kde released? Celeb told me 
its ready, he hasn't had time to repoman and blah blah. I am asking now, what 
i can do to get it arched.. This is a positive discussion on how to move this 
forward. If I can't do it, then so be it.

Thanks,
Jeff

Jeff

- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote:       I yield to Abdul Alhazred's superior knowledge of Cthulhu!
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA8CUnld4MRA3gEwYRAihcAJ9Gzt58sRxKpoplZYavBXaD9XYrvACgyfK3
1RJSFLuQoMSD2YJYWlC9QBk=
=HDMt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Chris Gianelloni]

On Sat, 2004-07-10 at 13:19, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> because I was told kde isn't ready simply because its not 30 days.  your 
> telling me now its just a guidline, which is what I thought in the 
> beginning..
> 
> Its come back full circle.

Not exactly... we've said over and over again that a package should
remain for ~30 days simply to weed out bugs.  It's been 30 days.  I
*never* said that KDE was not stable because it had not been in testing
for 30 days, but rather that you should wait until at least 30 days of
no bugs until asking why.  That part is pretty clear in the afore quoted
text.

> Like I have said, over and over.. How can I get kde released? Celeb told me 
> its ready, he hasn't had time to repoman and blah blah. I am asking now, what 
> i can do to get it arched.. This is a positive discussion on how to move this 
> forward. If I can't do it, then so be it.

How can you get KDE released?  You can't.  Only a developer with CVS
access can do that.  You can *help* by testing and whatnot, but in the
end, without access to commit to the CVS tree, you cannot complete a
release.

As for me personally attacking you, I've done no such thing.  I have
attacked *the way* that you have been portraying yourself through the
words you have chosen with your emails.  However, I have definitely been
out of line in some of my comments, and for that, I apologise.  I just
get tired of hearing users time and time again point out all of our
flaws with nothing helpful to say, until later when we point out that
their original comments were inflammatory.

Besides... why in the world would you want to use KDE anyway?  Gnome is
*way* better...

/me ducks

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering QA Manager/Games Developer
Gentoo Linux

Is your power animal a pengiun?


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[marduk]

[Okay, I have not read the entire thread as I came in on it late]

I think the problem is not primarily the fault of the Gentoo developers.
I see it as more as a issue with the "~" group: the brave souls who run
gentooware in the testing branch.  My understanding is that Gentoo
developers put stuff in ~* and expect to hear back from testers via
bugs.gentoo.org. Whether or not we have problems they expect to hear
from us, even if it's to say "ebuild x-y-z builds and runs fine on x86."
Most of us "~" users (myself included) simply upgrade new software and
if it doesn't work we go on our merry old way.  I'm guilty of this too.
But I think this gives the Gentoo developers the impression that it's
not been tested enough because not a lot of people are providing
feedback.  We usually only speak up when something is *not* working.  We
need to be more assertive if we are going to be "~" testers, because the
Gentoo developers look to us to determine if/when should go in the
stable branch.

So the next time you install a piece of software in the testing branch,
go to bugs.gentoo.org and see if their is an open item on that release.
If not open one yourself, but whatever you do, let the developers and
other users know your experiences running the new release on your
respective platforms.

Gentoo developers: please correct me if I'm wrong.

-m


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Donnie Berkholz]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 291 bytes --]

On Sat, 2004-07-10 at 12:14, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
> That's not necessarily a good idea. I'm getting so much spam via 
> <herd>@gentoo.org, that all non-bugzilla emails go directly into /dev/null.

Perhaps you should consider a spam scanner instead.
-- 
Donnie Berkholz
Gentoo Linux

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Dylan Carlson]

On Saturday 10 July 2004 1:08 pm, Jon Portnoy wrote:
> I have no idea how you can interpret statements that boiled down to "I
> stabilize things based on a number of factors including code review and
> my level of familiarity with the codebase" as some kind of anarchy. It'd
> really be great if you could engage in productive discussion rather than
> constantly trying to find ways to snipe at the dev team. That's why this
> thread has been dragging on.

Indeed.  Perhaps the new mantra for this ML should be:

       ---------------
       |   PLEASE    | 
       | DO NOT FEED |
       | THE  TROLLS |
       ---------------
             | |
             | |
             | |
             | |
        ` `  | |' '
       \ \  \| | // /
     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


-- 
Dylan Carlson [absinthe@gentoo.org]
Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x708E165F

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 476 bytes --]

On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 17:45:03 -0400 Dylan Carlson <absinthe@gentoo.org>
wrote:
| Indeed.  Perhaps the new mantra for this ML should be:
| 
|        ---------------
|        |   PLEASE    | 
|        | DO NOT FEED |
|        | THE  TROLLS |
|        ---------------

Hey! You stole my sign! That was around *my* neck...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Sparc, MIPS, Vim, Fluxbox)
Mail            : ciaranm at gentoo.org
Web             : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Carsten Lohrke]

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

On Saturday 10 July 2004 23:33, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Perhaps you should consider a spam scanner instead.
And looking up hundreds of spam emails for false positives once a week!? No, 
that's not much better. There are the mailing lists, bugzilla, irc and I'm 
reachable directly via email. No need to force another thing on me. It's time 
that spf spreads all over the world, btw..


Carsten
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA8G48VwbzmvGLSW8RAi2DAJ95M47WoS+/hvTYGCSxjzz8VFA4fACdHN09
pcD9i4XodyKTmztS8nskRaY=
=UxX/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: [OT] KDE 3.2.3

[Spider]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 582 bytes --]

begin  quote
On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 22:53:05 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Sat, 10 Jul 2004 17:45:03 -0400 Dylan Carlson <absinthe@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> | Indeed.  Perhaps the new mantra for this ML should be:
> | 
> |        ---------------
> |        |   PLEASE    | 
> |        | DO NOT FEED |
> |        | THE  TROLLS |
> |        ---------------
> 
> Hey! You stole my sign! That was around *my* neck...

*feeds Ciaran some red chili*



-- 
begin  .signature
Tortured users / Laughing in pain
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Saturday 10 July 2004 01:18 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> On Sat, 2004-07-10 at 13:19, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > because I was told kde isn't ready simply because its not 30 days.  your
> > telling me now its just a guidline, which is what I thought in the
> > beginning..
> >
> > Its come back full circle.
>
> Not exactly... we've said over and over again that a package should
> remain for ~30 days simply to weed out bugs.  It's been 30 days.  I
> *never* said that KDE was not stable because it had not been in testing
> for 30 days, but rather that you should wait until at least 30 days of
> no bugs until asking why.  That part is pretty clear in the afore quoted
> text.

Well, my intention was to find out how I could get it released. Thats it. 

> > Like I have said, over and over.. How can I get kde released? Celeb told
> > me its ready, he hasn't had time to repoman and blah blah. I am asking
> > now, what i can do to get it arched.. This is a positive discussion on
> > how to move this forward. If I can't do it, then so be it.
>
> How can you get KDE released?  You can't.  Only a developer with CVS
> access can do that.  You can *help* by testing and whatnot, but in the
> end, without access to commit to the CVS tree, you cannot complete a
> release.

Well, then I guess I am just suppose to wait till someone has time to do it. 
Which leads me back to what I had planned to do in the beginning. See if 
there is a solution we can come up with.Why not have have a single developer, 
per herd maybe if the herd is big, that his/her sole responsibility is to 
release software? Celeb doesn't have time, so he shoots and email to so and 
so, and he tells them to release it?

> As for me personally attacking you, I've done no such thing.  I have
> attacked *the way* that you have been portraying yourself through the
> words you have chosen with your emails.  However, I have definitely been
> out of line in some of my comments, and for that, I apologise.  I just
> get tired of hearing users time and time again point out all of our
> flaws with nothing helpful to say, until later when we point out that
> their original comments were inflammatory.

Lets just move on, we all said things we probably regret..

> Besides... why in the world would you want to use KDE anyway?  Gnome is
> *way* better...

I hate redhat, which in turn, makes me hate gnome since they use to be so tied 
to it.. And sill are?  You have no idea what I would like to do to gnome and 
redhat for that matter. 

Jeff
- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote:  ARRRGGHH!!!! ... (The sound of someone actually learning something)
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA8Vvjld4MRA3gEwYRAozUAKCSz2heHQo41/xDnAvR2jqcIRpnIgCZAa69
5g04Z7I70jtaiC2JfhBMIU4=
=Kbbw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] KDE 3.2.3

[Dylan Carlson]

On Saturday 10 July 2004 2:18 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> Besides... why in the world would you want to use KDE anyway?  Gnome is
> *way* better...

Wow, your desktop environment just got SERVED.

Let the flamewar begin!   (not really, but I'd just like to weigh in on why 
I use KDE...)

FWIW, I use KDE because it has everything I need, want, and didn't know I 
wanted (and then some) ... I resisted using the desktop for quite a while 
fearful that I would get too "married" to a particular branch of 
technology.  But as years went on I found myself using more and more KDE 
apps, simply because they were "better" (to use your term, heh).

At some juncture it was just the next logical step to use the desktop.  
Ever since I switched to the KDE desktop exclusively (since early 2003) it 
has made me a lot more productive.   And that's the bottom line.  For the 
things I do, KDE does them the best.   

"UserLinux" might be Gnome by fiat, but users will use whatever works best 
for them, not Bruce Perens.  And KDE has more users now... and I see a lot 
of merit in that, in the face of all the commercial promotion of Gnome by 
RedHat, Sun, Perens and others.

Most things can be done with some equivalency in Gnome.  But let's face 
facts -- Gnome would not exist without KDE.  Gnome was started as a 
project ~1996, was built upon a toolkit that was written for an image 
editor (gimp), for the sole purpose of making a "truly free" desktop, with 
the implication KDE wasn't.  KDE, which was built upon Qt, which was not 
"truly free" in, whatever, 1996.  

Of course that issue is moot now.   Qt is GPL just like all of KDE.  What 
remains is a matter of preference, most everything else claiming 
superiority of one over the other is hyperbole.

As a developer, I will say this:  If this were some case of disliking C++ I 
would understand, but only to a small extent.  If it works as well or 
better than competing technology, it doesn't matter (much) what the 
language is; and Qt clearly works well.  

As a user, I use what works.  As a developer or director of engineering, I 
would choose Qt/KDE over Gtk/Gnome.  The job can't get done in Gtk as 
quickly as Qt.  Also, Qt does things that Gtk doesn't. (Gtk you would have 
to tack on a few more libs in addition to the base Gtk library to be 
mostly equivalent with what Qt does by itself).  

Also compare the documentation and then tell me which you would rather work 
with:  

http://doc.trolltech.com/
http://www.gtk.org/api/

For the sake of the inevitable ("Trolltech controls Qt") counter-argument:  
If Trolltech ever pulled the GPL license off a future version of Qt-X11, 
the most recent GPL version can simply be forked.  There's no indication 
that will ever happen simply because it doesn't make any business sense 
for Trolltech.  Besides widening the user base for Qt, it gives them a 
cheap, global QA department and quality feedback from the KDE camp.

Cheers,
Dylan Carlson [absinthe@gentoo.org]
Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x708E165F

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] KDE 3.2.3

[Joseph Booker]

On Sun, July 11, 2004 1:16 pm, Dylan Carlson said:
> On Saturday 10 July 2004 2:18 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
>> Besides... why in the world would you want to use KDE anyway?  Gnome is
>> *way* better...

agreed on the second part :P
disagreed on the first though


> Wow, your desktop environment just got SERVED.
>
> Let the flamewar begin!   (not really, but I'd just like to weigh in on
> why
> I use KDE...)
<snip>

Gnome has advantages over KDE and visa versa, neither is really perfect in
any sense (don't get me started on it, I can argue against all and any WM,
'cept for the gettys :P )

and theres no need to make a long email in response to someone's sarcasim

I will say quite seriously for Jeff that to hate gnome because redhat
endorses it is both immature and goes against your previous statment *that
same email* over regretting things - making personal attacks on RedHat and
the Gnome project, when there maybe be members or customiser on this list
of them.

I hope by your reasoning that you are not using Novell products, as Novell
uses RedHat's rpm system for Suse, nor Mandrake, Yellow Dog, or any of the
other RedHat-derivied distros, nor are you using Mozilla, Firefox,
Thunderbird, or Netscape, as they are affilated with Gnome. I also hope by
that reasoning that you are not using the 'alien' package on your Gentoo
system, which depends on rpm. Furthermore, if you have had 'java' in your
USE flag while compiling gcc, guess what, you can take out all your hatred
against RedHat-affilated things on that.

All that being said, I hope you try to keep a more open mind, both in this
mailing list and anywhere else, and try not to hate things it only shows
your ignournce.

-- 
Joseph Booker
joe @ irc.neoturbine.net
jj110888 @ irc.freenode.net


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] KDE 3.2.3

[Dylan Carlson]

On Sunday 11 July 2004 5:38 pm, Joseph Booker wrote:
> Gnome has advantages over KDE and visa versa, neither is really perfect
> in any sense (don't get me started on it, I can argue against all and
> any WM, 'cept for the gettys :P )
>
> and theres no need to make a long email in response to someone's
> sarcasim
>

Sure.   I like Gnome, I just don't like it well enough that it would 
displace anything I'm doing with KDE.   Even if I went back to Fluxbox, I 
would still be using mostly KDE applications.   That's not a comment on 
the quality of Gnome applications, it's just what works better for me.

I like how Mono and Gnome are coupled; that's a significant technical 
feature of Gnome presently. Although there is some Qt-C# bindings work 
happening on KDE now, it's just not supported yet like it is on Gnome.

All software is imperfect.  Life is imperfect.  That's kind of a zen thing.

> All that being said, I hope you try to keep a more open mind, both in
> this mailing list and anywhere else, and try not to hate things it only
> shows your ignournce.

I think, perhaps, you're assuming a bit too much here.   I never said or 
implied hate for anything.   

By the way, if you're going to accuse someone of ignorance you might want 
to spell the word correctly.  But since I have an open mind, I'll accept 
the possibility you might have mis-typed it.  :-)

Cheers,
Dylan Carlson [absinthe@gentoo.org]
Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x708E165F

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] KDE 3.2.3

[Joseph Booker]

On Sun, July 11, 2004 6:37 pm, Dylan Carlson said:
> I think, perhaps, you're assuming a bit too much here.   I never said or
> implied hate for anything.
>
> By the way, if you're going to accuse someone of ignorance you might want
> to spell the word correctly.  But since I have an open mind, I'll accept
> the possibility you might have mis-typed it.  :-)

That paragraph was still directed towards Jeff, I sorta changed who i was
replying to in mid-email.

O, and about the mispelling, try accepting the possibility of me being too
lazy to spell check :P


-- 
Joseph Booker
joe @ irc.neoturbine.net
jj110888 @ irc.freenode.net


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Sunday 11 July 2004 04:38 pm, Joseph Booker wrote:

> I will say quite seriously for Jeff that to hate gnome because redhat
> endorses it is both immature and goes against your previous statment *that
> same email* over regretting things - making personal attacks on RedHat and
> the Gnome project, when there maybe be members or customiser on this list
> of them.

I hate them and I can choose to. So get over it. Redhat used to big a big part 
of gnome. Redhat also use to be a big portion of the development code as 
well, thats why they like it so much. What I said was, I hate redhat and 
gnome for a reason. But I never said why. I didn't personally attack them, I 
just said I hated the both of them.. Get your facts straight before you run 
your mouth about how I do this and that.

People say they hate things all the time. Thats not a personal attack, me 
saying I hate them because they are murders is a personal attack. (they are 
not murders I am using it as an example)

Fact is, Alan Cox works for redhat.. I think he still does anyway. I respect 
him a great deal. So redhat does have some good points to them. 

> I hope by your reasoning that you are not using Novell products, as Novell
> uses RedHat's rpm system for Suse, nor Mandrake, Yellow Dog, or any of the
> other RedHat-derivied distros, nor are you using Mozilla, Firefox,
> Thunderbird, or Netscape, as they are affilated with Gnome. I also hope by
> that reasoning that you are not using the 'alien' package on your Gentoo
> system, which depends on rpm. Furthermore, if you have had 'java' in your
> USE flag while compiling gcc, guess what, you can take out all your hatred
> against RedHat-affilated things on that.

None.. I don't use any of it.. Thanks for asking though.  -java on all my 
machines. My system works great too. whats so great about it I need it?

Frankly, thats just a matter of me liking something more. Not because redhat 
has anything to do with them.. I don't hate them that much. ;)

I just disagree highly with gnome and RPM really. you deal with rpm like I did 
through 4.0 to around 7. The hell I had to deal with on dependencies. Anyone 
who has used redhat for any length of time will know that hell very well. 
up2date, I hear, fixed some of it. but I was already on gentoo by then.

What is so wrong with that? Not a personal attack, its just how I feel about 
it.

> All that being said, I hope you try to keep a more open mind, both in this
> mailing list and anywhere else, and try not to hate things it only shows
> your ignournce.

No, people hate kde for a reason.. Some are actually valid points.. I don't 
take offense to it because I use kde. Its their opinion.. get on a gnome list 
and you can just see the hatred towards kde.. :)

Wow, you need to settle down a little bit. You don't know me, and you didn't 
know what I hated about it.

Now lets get back to gentoo, thats what this list is about anyway.

Jeff
- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: "I am Christopher Robin of Borg. You sit here and assimilate Piglet."
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA8e2wld4MRA3gEwYRAt33AJ0QH4hiMMFPWPV0nY8qAKTWAvDfOwCdHEAa
VQ0IAhwpCzVZfkvtI76jW2s=
=KLEy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] KDE 3.2.3

[marduk]

On Sun, 2004-07-11 at 20:47 -0500, Jeff Smelser wrote:

> I hate them and I can choose to. So get over it.

Hate is a very strong word.  Perhaps if you are feeling so much hate you
should talk with someone to try to figure out whether something is wrong
to cause you to feel that way.

But that seems to be the color of your conversations as long as I have
been following you on this list.  Of course myself and others could be
perceiving you the wrong way, but I personally feel you should deal with
any demons that might be haunting you before you post to this list so
that others not fall victim to them.

-m


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

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

On Sunday 11 July 2004 09:09 pm, marduk wrote:
> On Sun, 2004-07-11 at 20:47 -0500, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> > I hate them and I can choose to. So get over it.
>
> Hate is a very strong word.  Perhaps if you are feeling so much hate you
> should talk with someone to try to figure out whether something is wrong
> to cause you to feel that way.

Hmm.. Well, you might want to tap into gentoo-user. I see it all the time. I 
hate this, I hate that.. I don't see into shrink talk after that..

> But that seems to be the color of your conversations as long as I have
> been following you on this list.  Of course myself and others could be
> perceiving you the wrong way, but I personally feel you should deal with
> any demons that might be haunting you before you post to this list so
> that others not fall victim to them.

I am at peace.. Very happy in my life... Better job maybe.. More money will 
always be nice.. Win the lottery maybe.. 

Jeff
- -- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote:    Al, I just leaped into a tagline.  What does Ziggy have to say?
=======================================================================
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFA8fV7ld4MRA3gEwYRAiPNAJ9VK7CLa8FvPujlkQDI72FDantvVQCfatz9
n2Zo6WCFkKC+ZwcgzsPHaCU=
=AH0E
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] KDE 3.2.3

[Seemant Kulleen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 399 bytes --]

ok, ffs, can we PLEASE get off this thread?  It's silly, it's off topic
and it's completely and utterly irrelevant.  This gentoo-dev NOT
gentoo-/.

-- 
"Check out the hook while my DJ revolves it"

Seemant Kulleen
http://dev.gentoo.org/~seemant

Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x3458780E
Key fingerprint = 23A9 7CB5 9BBB 4F8D 549B 6593 EDA2 65D8 3458 780E

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] KDE 3.2.3

[marduk]

On Sun, 2004-07-11 at 22:36 -0500, Dave wrote:

> Thats a little reactionary.  He didn't say that he hoped the development
> staff of both Gnome and Red Hat die horrible deaths.  He said he didn't
> like it.  He even said he hated it.  So what?  I hate a lot of things.
> Seems to me that you're starting your own arguement due to a personal
> reason of your own. :)

Perhaps your are right, Dave, as use of the word "hate" is a personal peeve of 
mine, especially when directed towards a particular person or group of people.
My apologies for reacting in such a personal manner and having taken it out
on this list.

--m  


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] KDE 3.2.3

[Dave]

On Sun, 2004-07-11 at 21:09 -0500, marduk wrote:
> Hate is a very strong word.  Perhaps if you are feeling so much hate you
> should talk with someone to try to figure out whether something is wrong
> to cause you to feel that way.
> 
> But that seems to be the color of your conversations as long as I have
> been following you on this list.  Of course myself and others could be
> perceiving you the wrong way, but I personally feel you should deal with
> any demons that might be haunting you before you post to this list so
> that others not fall victim to them.

Thats a little reactionary.  He didn't say that he hoped the development
staff of both Gnome and Red Hat die horrible deaths.  He said he didn't
like it.  He even said he hated it.  So what?  I hate a lot of things.
Seems to me that you're starting your own arguement due to a personal
reason of your own. :)

In any case, I like Gnome, but I don't like that Gnome is starting to
become more and more resource intensive.  Right now I use XFce4, which
to me seems like Gnome-lite.  It uses GTK so that it looks and feels
like Gnome, but without Nautilus and Metacity sucking down all my
resources.  XFce4 is minimal when compared to Gnome or KDE, but its also
quite featureful when compared to Fluxbox.

Its a nice happy medium. :)

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] KDE 3.2.3

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1152 bytes --]

On Monday 12 July 2004 03:47, Jeff Smelser wrote:
> On Sunday 11 July 2004 04:38 pm, Joseph Booker wrote:
> > I will say quite seriously for Jeff that to hate gnome because redhat
> > endorses it is both immature and goes against your previous statment
> > *that same email* over regretting things - making personal attacks on
> > RedHat and the Gnome project, when there maybe be members or
> > customiser on this list of them.
>
> I hate them and I can choose to. So get over it. Redhat used to big a
> big part of gnome. Redhat also use to be a big portion of the
> development code as well, thats why they like it so much. What I said
> was, I hate redhat and gnome for a reason. But I never said why. I
> didn't personally attack them, I just said I hated the both of them..
> Get your facts straight before you run your mouth about how I do this
> and that.
>

But in this case you also cannot use kde. Kde uses libxml2 which is a 
gnome lib as a core part. It also uses other gnome libs optionally, so 
get over it.

Paul

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

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] [OT] KDE 3.2.3

[Jeff Smelser]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 652 bytes --]

On Wednesday 04 August 2004 06:18 am, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> On Monday 12 July 2004 03:47, Jeff Smelser wrote:

> But in this case you also cannot use kde. Kde uses libxml2 which is a
> gnome lib as a core part. It also uses other gnome libs optionally, so
> get over it.

This is old.. 

You need to check the dates before you reply.. this hasn't been talked about 
since july 12.

-- 
=======================================================================
Jabber: tradergt@(smelser.org|jabber.org)
Quote: 	 I am Hamlet of Borg. Prepare to be... or not to be.
=======================================================================

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