From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Mxs2J-00061i-9u for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:48:15 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D2344E084C; Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:48:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 92860E084C for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:48:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vapier.localnet (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D3D2B4D89 for ; Wed, 14 Oct 2009 00:48:13 +0000 (UTC) From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc-0.5.1 arrived in the tree Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:48:11 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.1 (Linux/2.6.31; KDE/4.3.1; x86_64; ; ) References: <200910091957.09193.zzam@gentoo.org> <200910132017.54281.vapier@gentoo.org> <20091014003335.GA20367@aerie.halcy0n.com> In-Reply-To: <20091014003335.GA20367@aerie.halcy0n.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2885691.Q89qckutdc"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200910132048.12228.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 4549ef9c-d051-4625-ba88-299d6628d8b6 X-Archives-Hash: ed387d589af31de12bf3556673a48810 --nextPart2885691.Q89qckutdc Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tuesday 13 October 2009 20:33:35 Mark Loeser wrote: > Mike Frysinger said: > > On Tuesday 13 October 2009 19:30:52 Joshua Saddler wrote: > > > All that to say, Tommy (et al), is that the idea of expecting users to > > > magically know everything and not to offer any documentation *in > > > advance* . . . is a silly idea. Good lord, can you imagine the > > > shitstorm the X11 team would have gone through if they'd tried *that* > > > without first writing up xserver 1.5 and 1.6 migration guides?! > > > > we arent talking migrations that are forced onto everyone. we're talki= ng > > about new code that users have to *opt in* for ("new net") that is only > > available in unstable. expecting everything in testing to be documented > > up front is unreasonable. no one is saying the stuff shouldnt be > > documented, just that complete user friendly coverage is not a > > requirement for unstable. your comments here dont really apply to > > bleeding edge -- they certainly apply to stable though. > > I'd say this isn't correct. Unstable isn't a pure testing playground. > its meant for packages that should be considered for stable. As such, > we should make sure that we get the documentation needed ready, so we > can make sure that it is correct for people that are testing the upgrade > path for us. It then gives us a chance to correct our documentation > before it goes stable. i disagree with this strict interpretation of stable vs unstable. while it= 's=20 a noble ideal, it isnt realistic. we have plenty of versions that go into= =20 unstable with no plans of them going stable as they're good for vetting new= =20 issues on the way to a newer stable version. i'd prefer to have a bunch of= =20 smaller changes with minor issues in each than a large code dump which is h= ard=20 to coordinate problems with actual changes. > All this comes down to is laziness in documenting changes, and forcing > stuff upon our users. Neither of those things is good, and if everyone > thinks that's the status quo...that really should change. then everyone in Gentoo is lazy because we always have things that lack 100= %=20 coverage. we also arent forcing anything onto users. the documentation ho= le=20 here applies only to new code that is disabled by default. =2Dmike --nextPart2885691.Q89qckutdc Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJK1R/MAAoJEEFjO5/oN/WBaKYQAILrqH0Ip1nQ5n3hDqYECN/F BvpaocdHWiI7GAcndiBtF3B9YN2ulIELna3XGOvsw8b7D64DsQOnEtnt+vM1uC2L K03LGX8MjaQXeTkut/c2Bv4gqBSv2rPdqQ+giyrpmfD6k8rSduYWbmAfWwzwxH7o RRGT36wP5FeHinpVxoHtgkYo0l2/pro/zDjYRAZAvGo99hvYi3U/yqb6YLWsAusu h3hJ+rw8Rn+q9zlVXj6+SvFlY3M8Q66eYfzoUZNRo7Lw1MEviRTRt5fnLoscP3C3 TE7LwJ5YgIWM/46rMEYmzYpsQ25yVERySgjNjiZyi4P9CtIgpMEl0FiYMa1Zbx34 7OsZF0ZhdX10goXKLfZxons8WP+F4AbPMK5RMpxsIPKx2GqoztK+piowDGCem2OE NJ+HwxN0GHfXP9XB3yhlifdx/Q1dpA8e17wHv5J8EflvKLkK8yFMOnpUfcfQ6CsT HAPoF+wGA6xCu9JtM8vNaZbO3ysJI5CAAFC4/NDKLETaUJ1OS9KGpZ7nQEu2oDlR n6RJ/BiK/jZZcV3ibVKGXTlqWnZNGWk6/ewuFnOenY2nqVVfUrh+O5PGqqrjQXVt iY9w5VYVWQINlawr0fxUwI4PqQva0evapxz0LjWHGwq8+RwP2PXhKvok4t6l1npO B42zBgPE5RYVv4wMMrrT =mF0Z -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2885691.Q89qckutdc--