From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jdu2u-0007wM-9h for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:17:32 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5BA80E0555; Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:16:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from nameserver1.mcve.com (nameserver1.mcve.com [216.155.111.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 315B2E0555 for ; Mon, 24 Mar 2008 21:16:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.55] (shop.monetra.com [216.155.111.10]) by nameserver1.mcve.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 487BF10946D2; Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:16:12 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <47E81A1A.60803@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 24 Mar 2008 17:16:10 -0400 From: Doug Goldstein User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (X11/20080227) 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 To: Mike Frysinger , gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] OpenRC & baselayout-2 meets Gentoo References: <47E1F3C4.5060907@gentoo.org> <47E80E92.5060704@gentoo.org> <200803241708.01550.vapier@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200803241708.01550.vapier@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: c29438b2-e597-4700-8a8e-a52cc14e4633 X-Archives-Hash: 10c7f36a1ae7a23b83b3b384b983717f Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Monday 24 March 2008, Doug Goldstein wrote: > >> Doug Goldstein wrote: >> >>> All, >>> >>> This is a formal notice to everyone that OpenRC will be hitting the >>> Gentoo tree sooner rather then later. I would like to see *ALL* arch >>> teams give the current code a whirl on their systems, which is >>> available via the layman module "openrc". >>> >>> I would also like to give the docs team a chance to weigh in here and >>> work with me on a migration guide as well as any necessary updates. >>> >>> That being said, I will be the primary point of contact on the >>> transition to OpenRC appearing in ~arch (along with it's associated >>> baselayout-2.0.0 ebuild). Any and all grievances, concerns, >>> suggestions and comments can and should be routed to me via the >>> associated Bugzilla entries or e-mail. >>> >>> I do not want OpenRC to come as a surprise to anyone and break their >>> system. I expect we will leave no stone unturned and go for a very >>> smooth transition. >>> >>> That being said, the bug for the addition of OpenRC is #212696 [1]. >>> The bug for the documentation is #213988 [2]. >>> >>> Lastly, I will be out of town March 21st through March 23rd. I will >>> not have IRC access but I will have e-mail and Bugzilla access. >>> >>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=212696 >>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=213988 >>> >> It appears my migration plan was not good enough for Mike Frysinger >> and he went ahead and wrote his own version of the >> OpenRC ebuild, differing from the one in the OpenRC layman repo, and >> committed it to the tree this weekend. >> >> Since my offer to work on the migration was not good enough for him, I'm >> backing out and allowing him to handle the whole migration himself since >> I haven't heard from him at all despite Roy (author of OpenRC) and my >> attempts to contact him for 2 weeks regarding a migration plan for >> OpenRC. All issues and comments can be directed to him. >> >> I guess working together and documenting everything before having it hit >> the tree was a bad plan and it had to be one-upped. >> > > not sure why you're getting pissy. but let's put some things straight shall > we. > > - the ebuild in question was from the layman repo. i changed things of course > because it didnt cover all upgrade pieces, had obvious style problems, and > did some things wrongly. > You mean it wasn't bash style and instead was functional POSIX shell style. And by all upgrade paths would that include adding the bad conversion of /etc/modules.autoload.d/ and removing important ewarn msgs to users? > - i'd been poking openrc on my system long before "this weekend". > Great. And have you been working with the docs people or the arch teams and with the Gentoo/FreeBSD guys? Because some of your changes might work on your system, but not on other systems > - only pinging people on irc does not constitute real effort. we have e-mail > addresses too last i checked. > Refresh your mail client because I did send you e-mail. And as far as I know, Roy did too. > - the package is still p.masked and de-keyworded. nothing precludes you from > working on it. or writing docs. or doing anything else you're talking about > doing. > - and no, i dont have a problem sticking masked/de-keyworded things in the > tree. people test things then. > -mike > It's called teamwork, Mike. It also looks awful suspicious when we don't hear a peep out of you about OpenRC until 1 day before I was going to add it to the tree. What would have been so hard about sending a follow up e-mail to the thread I started about getting OpenRC in the tree saying "Hey everyone, going to stick openrc-9999 in the tree now with some changes I feel should be made." -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list