From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EEbha-00019O-8t for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 11 Sep 2005 23:57:38 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j8BNq2W5000381; Sun, 11 Sep 2005 23:52:03 GMT Received: from mail.wildgooses.com (mail.wildgooses.com [81.6.236.5]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j8BNmndp020883 for ; Sun, 11 Sep 2005 23:48:50 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.wildgooses.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28A0333FED for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 00:53:07 +0100 (BST) Received: from mail.wildgooses.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.wildgooses.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 15927-06-4 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 00:53:03 +0100 (BST) Received: from [192.168.105.2] (unknown [81.6.236.5]) by mail.wildgooses.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D7DD33F4F for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2005 00:53:03 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <4324C35F.5090008@wildgooses.com> Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2005 00:53:03 +0100 From: Ed W User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (X11/20050818) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [Summary] tentative x86 arch team glep References: <200509061903.39000.chriswhite@gentoo.org> <431DCBE9.4090907@wildgooses.com> <20050906182129.5725cf67@snowdrop.home> In-Reply-To: <20050906182129.5725cf67@snowdrop.home> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at wildgooses.com X-Archives-Salt: 96f00c39-7406-4676-aff0-7b4b5d94c20a X-Archives-Hash: 99d9315cc186c09840bfe4b1d9bfddb2 Ciaran McCreesh wrote: >On Tue, 06 Sep 2005 18:03:37 +0100 Ed W wrote: >| As an "outsider" reading that summary the message *I* read is that >| there is some strain over fitting the development model into >| "stable", "~", and "package.mask". I think I see people basically >| saying that they have differing views over what qualifies for each >| level? > >The system basically works. The problems are: > >* It's not always used correctly. >* It's not entirely understood by some users. >* Some users think it should be easier to unmask a group of related >packages. > > Might there be an option 4 which is that a slightly different system might stop everyone bitching over the current one and hence avoid wasting some time? Nope, no idea what that would be, but the thought does occur when you see some time being wasted on trivial issues... >| Also, as someone who has submitted a few patches and some ebuilds and >| then seen nothing happen to them and my offers to act as maintainer >| have gone unresponded I also wonder if there is some way to make >| better use of casual contributors like me? (I'm not bitter, it's just >| that I feel I could contribute more, but don't know how to?) > >The problem is... Getting someone ready to be able to commit to the >main tree is expensive in terms of existing developer time. The >solution isn't lowering the standards for commit access, because that >just leads to even more wasted developer time. There's the two tier >system that gets proposed every now and again, but that would a) >require svn rather than cvs and b) require that certain people who >currently have main tree access be moved to branch access only. > >A bigger tree is all well and good, but the tree we have right now is >only half maintained... > > Is there any possibility that easier low quality contribution makes the high quality contributions easier? Look at wikipedia - it's amazing that such high quality work (in general) can come from lightly peer review material with low barriers to entry. Clearly not an appropriate model here, but I can't help wondering if there is not another way... I did read the FAQ here and I take your point though: http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm/docs/mw-faq/maintainer.txt Thanks for listening Ed W -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list