From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC3A71381F3 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 15:45:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E18DCE0D1D; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 15:45:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from jacques.telenet-ops.be (jacques.telenet-ops.be [195.130.132.50]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C607BE0D01 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 15:45:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TOMWIJ-GENTOO ([94.226.55.127]) by jacques.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id Aflr1m00l2khLEN0JflrTe; Fri, 09 Aug 2013 17:45:51 +0200 Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 17:42:08 +0200 From: Tom Wijsman To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Cc: alonbl@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gnome Stabilization 3.6 or 3.8 Message-ID: <20130809174208.10d7ed87@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: References: <5203A880.1050306@gentoo.org> <5203B190.80306@gentoo.org> <20130808172340.7d2424af@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <5203C908.1000304@gentoo.org> <20130808185357.4208db83@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20130808202627.4b474471@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20130809020303.GA11215@linux1> <1376033807.30224.21.camel@kanae> <5204B6A9.1080309@gentoo.org> <5204E235.7010702@gentoo.org> <5204F36B.3090601@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/erfSqbDwRZx_K0VU3RYpU+D"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: aa9b6883-9b56-4d8e-9741-c943caf73a52 X-Archives-Hash: a9a611cf44ca811f4c9f00079d42d401 --Sig_/erfSqbDwRZx_K0VU3RYpU+D Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 9 Aug 2013 17:40:28 +0300 Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > At least we know what ssuominen thinks... some prople are trying to > hijack the Gentoo project at the excuse of Gnome to switch into > specific vendor solution, and be on its mercies from now on. This was > the exact plan of whoever put all these $$ in > udev/systemd/gnome/fedora and effect the entire ecosystem, and slowly > own the entire solutions. As Linux userland become more and more > monolithic per the plan of that vendor, and if we yield, there will be > no real difference between Fedora and Gentoo, so what have we > accomplished? There come the new Microsoft and conquered the free open > source world using $$ and ambassadors. As far as I am aware this discussion is not about yielding; so, there is nothing to be concerned about with the outcome of this discussion. > What we basically say is that Gentoo cannot have their own agenda and > now submit to dictation of a single vendor of how Linux should be > managed and run. Gentoo has its own agenda; but, I'm under the impression that you aren't following that agenda, instead opposing to some non-existing dictation. > To provide good service to our users we need a clear stand, what will > developers (throughout the tree) will be maintaining. Developers are free in that as long as policy, QA and security permit. > If a user installs a component he does expect it to work and > maintained. And we cannot force all developers to support two > different layouts, and we cannot allow developers to support layout > of their choice, as users will get a totally broken solution, because > of the aspirations of developer/herd they get different level of > support. We don't need to force all developers to support multiple layouts. If someone cannot support it, another developer can jump in and support it; as an end result, you don't get a totally broken solution. > I don't care if systemd is worked on by people, however it must be > clearly mark as unstable as long as there is no decision to switch. It is marked as stable; if you wish to see it unstable, you will probably want to file another thread stating the reasons why you believe it must be marked as such. The Gnome 3.8 stabilization thread we are in now is not the place to request to mark systemd unstable. --=20 With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : TomWij@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D --Sig_/erfSqbDwRZx_K0VU3RYpU+D Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSBQ3QAAoJEJWyH81tNOV9qMIIALCDIDJWgXatk8wB72pOTXV9 InTus6sjWGuUoxM596g6+qKFeA7K5VPTP9fFbRkl5GWtxgF2TEIiOpCZAO0fcqMw d27vNnBLD5qU/y7yarSOHR28J98nAuDV/dyxEsGJjW+2Nuq4qiUM4vc0mbSuXBeZ HryfT2vSFolziRVQHVOk4+hNa8yQLybZwiovaz+tdp/vMMqFVZG8mJ2SWlshEpUm DsjIa3t/IW+5FrJ5dRJb+DzmvRfyWiQpA28dSuFdSqLF/Wt53Xwz0346ZHrTANT/ 6BlzhxG1HWj9vG0gbgHDzTA6Z4iE0hcj9YMLBsHuKdQkvPHYLOe1c38BtRBe6/Y= =8HsI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/erfSqbDwRZx_K0VU3RYpU+D--