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 4.54) id 1FMRmD-0004ql-B8 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:31:05 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.5) with SMTP id k2NFUW0M020766; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:30:32 GMT Received: from smtp.top-hosting.cz (gw.top-hosting.cz [81.0.254.91]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k2NFS7Vx007069 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:28:08 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.top-hosting.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7797FA7D55D for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:28:07 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp.top-hosting.cz ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.top-hosting.cz [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 02217-02-2 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:28:04 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.0.1] (21.217.broadband4.iol.cz [85.71.217.21]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.top-hosting.cz (Postfix) with ESMTP id B61FD50F36D for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:28:03 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <4422BE7D.7000502@gentoo.org> Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 16:27:57 +0100 From: Jakub Moc User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5 (X11/20051201) 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] Official overlay support References: <441F35B9.8000406@gentoo.org> <4421836A.8040000@gentoo.org> <1143123468.14434.5.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> In-Reply-To: <1143123468.14434.5.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.0.0 OpenPGP: url=http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xCEBA3D9E Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-ripemd160; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigA96C1949019FF6ED57A9C8B4" X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new 2.3.3 (20050822) at top-hosting.cz X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.608 tagged_above=-999 required=6 tests=[AWL=0.991, BAYES_00=-2.599] X-Spam-Score: -1.608 X-Spam-Level: X-Archives-Salt: b6db938a-f6c3-41ce-9278-caedca5d9ef8 X-Archives-Hash: 98914d81a895dd9b61b8dc8aa8b4a1e5 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigA96C1949019FF6ED57A9C8B4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Wed, 2006-03-22 at 22:03 +0000, Stuart Herbert wrote: >> To answer Daniel's other question, about bugs.g.o ... trac on >> overlays.g.o will have its bug tracking system disabled. We already >> have one bug tracking system - bugs.g.o - and that's sufficient. >=20 > Umm... no? >=20 > If some random developer goes out there and creates his own fork of > catalyst in his overlay, I sure don't want to receive a *single* bug on= > it. Ever. >=20 > If you're already using Trac, you should keep the bug tracking enabled,= > so the bugs stay with the overlay. Once something moves into the > official tree, then it can use bugs.gentoo.org for its bug tracking. > This means developers that don't wish to participate in the overlays ar= e > not forced to waste their time troubleshooting problems in these > overlays and can focus on our *core* product, the portage tree. Well, I don't care much, as long as: - there's a separate Overlays product in bugzilla for this - each such overlay has its own component under Overlay product with default assignees set up (no, I won't check out all those overlays to find out the maintainer, also, almost none of them uses metadata.xml) - users are *vigorously* :P instructed to file the bugs under that product/component and/or (?) mark them with something like [overlay-xxx] so that I don't have to ponder who's maintaining that thing. If they don't, the bugs end up as invalid b/c the ebuild is not in portage. Easy enough. While keeping those bugs in trac bug trackers seemed as a good idea to me originally, most users are simply unable to do that anyway. We tried w/ php overlay, didn't work much. --=20 Best regards, Jakub Moc mailto:jakub@gentoo.org GPG signature: http://subkeys.pgp.net:11371/pks/lookup?op=3Dget&search=3D0xCEBA3D9E Primary key fingerprint: D2D7 933C 9BA1 C95B 2C95 B30F 8717 D5FD CEBA 3= D9E ... still no signature ;) --------------enigA96C1949019FF6ED57A9C8B4 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEIr6ChxfV/c66PZ4RA6P1AJ9tWQKtV5qJ49RV/mCfVUpw3WmYYwCePaxs nq5b48onOIcDXrvzP1o+oVc= =p8MB -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigA96C1949019FF6ED57A9C8B4-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list