From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.3 required=5.0 tests=DATE_IN_FUTURE_03_06, DMARC_NONE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from obelix.spectraweb.ch (obelix.plusnet.ch [194.158.230.8]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4AD3ABD50 for ; Sun, 9 Jun 2002 07:49:03 -0500 (CDT) Received: from seul.org (adsl-p42-dialup-89.adslplus.ch [195.141.144.89]) by obelix.spectraweb.ch (8.11.2/8.9.3/SuSE Linux 8.9.3-0.1) with ESMTP id g59Cmw006180 for ; Sun, 9 Jun 2002 14:48:58 +0200 Message-ID: <3D03A270.10101@seul.org> Date: Sun, 09 Jun 2002 14:46:08 -0400 From: Marko Mikulicic User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020204 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Contribute many ebuilds at once References: <3D02F8A8.7030108@seul.org> <200206091256.52748.pauldv@cs.kun.nl> <3D0391D8.7090003@seul.org> <20020609122537.GA15971@bingo.localdomain> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: 891e2c17-0d07-42a9-8f43-24806428353c X-Archives-Hash: 04ce083f6ad664f2610f0945996e0553 >> >>_______________________________________________ >>gentoo-dev mailing list >>gentoo-dev@gentoo.org >>http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev >> > > Marko, I am not answering your question, but I also have > some similar ideas. > > What about a rating system for ebuilds? > > A brand new ebuild would start no votes and no rating > which indicates it is not been thoroughly used and hence > should only be used by those willing to deal with problems. > As more people use the ebuild, they rate it and it gets > more ratings. If the ratings are bad, people will know > to stay away from it. If the ratings are good, people will > known that the ebuild should not have problems. > > I can't think of any reason why this would not work. If anyone > knows of one I would like to hear it. > I think it's a good idea, but still there should be a firm barrier from what goes in to "official" distribution and what is in the middle zone. This rating could apply to both but I think its only really useful in the middle zone (purgatory). What kind of interface for voting do you have in mind ? (how to vote + how to read the rate. integrate with emerge ... ?) Marko