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 40E991387FD for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 08:57:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 17505E091A; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 08:57:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 121A6E08CE for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 08:57:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [141.44.155.163] (unknown [141.44.155.163]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: tomka) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D37B833FF43 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 08:57:22 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <5396C87C.3040604@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 10:57:32 +0200 From: Thomas Kahle User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.5.0 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: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] The state and future of the OpenRC project References: <20140607201920.0e0ccd5c@gentoo.org> <53937778.7020604@sporkbox.us> <20140607230815.07bc18e7@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> <5393B6D8.4080201@gentoo.org> <20140608135616.581807d8@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> <53947600.50506@gentoo.org> <20140608171543.45bf6ce7@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> <53948A21.6020809@gentoo.org> <5396106A.4010209@gentoo.org> <53962AF6.1050500@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <53962AF6.1050500@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="Xl0nHOnLf4QH8VA1oLrPfNpCWOwbG5Q1A" X-Archives-Salt: f62e51d5-7173-4d0d-bf63-b619ad59d827 X-Archives-Hash: 34f9c118999292dad18ecd6dd203a1d7 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --Xl0nHOnLf4QH8VA1oLrPfNpCWOwbG5Q1A Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 09.06.2014 23:45, hasufell wrote: > Thomas Kahle: >> then they stay in the overlay >> because people feel it is not worth the effort to fix the QA >> issues which in turn would be necessary before moving them to the >> main tree. >> >=20 > Probably because no one mentored them on how to fix these QA issues. > Otherwise... if that's attitude, then that's just sad and has to be > fixed by those who run that overlay (review, contribution guidelines). I was mentored on the QA issues and have come to 'this attitude' myself. Take sci-mathematics/singular: Upstream is genuinely not interested in supporting distriutions or their petty QA unless you can prove them that there is a problem that massively hurts them. Fixing compatibility with user specified LDFLAGS? They'll laugh at you. Their attitude is a result of years and years of struggling with too little manpower themselves. They can hardly keep up with scientific developments. My personal attitude: It is just not worth the effort to rewrite their build systems for the ~10 users out there. I have better things to do with my time and I think that these packages can live forever in the overlay and that is completely OK this way. > And I still think that the top 1 reason people run an overlay is becaus= e > it's easier than contributing directly. > A lot of overlay maintainers I tried to convince on getting more > involved even said that. I think that's a different point. I've also met people who just don't want to become developers because their "it's not worth my time" boundary is on the other side of the quizzes. So one could say yes, contributing to overlays is convenient enough to never do quizzes. The arguments I have heard are not about bugzilla workflow. They are: I don't get that much more from being a full dev, so I don't bother taking the quizzes. > Even sunrise workflow has proven too slow and cumbersome... look at the= > commit history, it's constantly decreasing. I don't know sunrise. > Sure, reasons may vary, but there is not much positive to say about > current gentoo workflow. Here's a positive thing: There are many ways to contribute, even without taking lenghty quizzes :) Cheers, Thoams --Xl0nHOnLf4QH8VA1oLrPfNpCWOwbG5Q1A Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTlsh9AAoJEDHSY8ey5xaRR4UH/jXs8MKh/iKv/gmMiKF1RICg dDbnvrgEElNcTBDKiFwKw7ZqEfi+pv6AQ3nAgnmg9R+5xxmKOOVUlDAaByZQ49qg oc+UjkvTu4XuJ1BDVV10sDPRZ9FqsdBzit4PVKyS/c+2UuCiUBlJ+aNGSzjPLp05 OtahU1iCuazUAGZKwFPT/1wr5QKcI+e8ne7A49QKgAwPKUvpKGnGgmcy2nXgWtgm vy5c5+NqdvvyiONjH1Il+hbC4Su896BoDxuXU4xlPs86/i7kXLeHxzbB7je/lWrs 7kasO5PXc/Zd038xQOvk/Uf3yvoo8IIV8qlptH3zaiIIG3zX98xlnS7cVrxUqK8= =+riz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Xl0nHOnLf4QH8VA1oLrPfNpCWOwbG5Q1A--