[gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[M.B.]

Hello folks.

While hacking away on a new ebuild I came across the issue that
games.eclass apparently got banned from future use. The only references
I was able to dig up (apart from helpful people on IRC), were
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=566498 (games.eclass: use of
games group needs to be removed wrt 20151011 Council meeting)
and
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Quality_Assurance/Meeting_Summaries#Games_team_policies_issue
(A mere deprecation notice).

In contrast, a simple "grep deprec /usr/portage/eclass/" gives numerous
deprecation warnings; just games.eclass is not among them.

Please provide some guidance how (community-)developers are supposed to
handle games (in particular wrt games.eclass) in the future. This also
includes usage of /usr/games/{bin/lib/share} etc.

Regards,
tomboy64

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Patrice Clement]

Sunday 07 Feb 2016 11:38:27, M.B. wrote :
> 
> Hello folks.
> 
> While hacking away on a new ebuild I came across the issue that
> games.eclass apparently got banned from future use. The only references
> I was able to dig up (apart from helpful people on IRC), were
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=566498 (games.eclass: use of
> games group needs to be removed wrt 20151011 Council meeting)
> and
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Quality_Assurance/Meeting_Summaries#Games_team_policies_issue
> (A mere deprecation notice).
> 
> In contrast, a simple "grep deprec /usr/portage/eclass/" gives numerous
> deprecation warnings; just games.eclass is not among them.
> 
> Please provide some guidance how (community-)developers are supposed to
> handle games (in particular wrt games.eclass) in the future. This also
> includes usage of /usr/games/{bin/lib/share} etc.
> 
> Regards,
> tomboy64
> 
> 

Good point. 

I too came across this problem when dealing with another bug
(games-emulation/ppsspp). A user filed a bug, complaining the ebuild wasn't
installing the compiled binary in /usr/games and suggested it should inherit
the games eclass: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=572606#c12 

I wasn't aware of the ban too so if someone has a better solution, I'm all
ears.

Regards,

-- 
Patrice Clement
Gentoo Linux developer
http://www.gentoo.org

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1193 bytes --]

On Sun, 7 Feb 2016 11:38:27 +0100
"M.B." <tomboy64@sina.cn> wrote:

> Hello folks.
> 
> While hacking away on a new ebuild I came across the issue that
> games.eclass apparently got banned from future use. The only references
> I was able to dig up (apart from helpful people on IRC), were
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=566498 (games.eclass: use of
> games group needs to be removed wrt 20151011 Council meeting)
> and
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Quality_Assurance/Meeting_Summaries#Games_team_policies_issue
> (A mere deprecation notice).
> 
> In contrast, a simple "grep deprec /usr/portage/eclass/" gives numerous
> deprecation warnings; just games.eclass is not among them.
> 
> Please provide some guidance how (community-)developers are supposed to
> handle games (in particular wrt games.eclass) in the future. This also
> includes usage of /usr/games/{bin/lib/share} etc.

For reference, this is the reference decision:

https://projects.gentoo.org/council/meeting-logs/20151213-summary.txt

I'm going to open a bug asking games team how they're going to proceed.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Daniel Campbell]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 02/07/2016 03:09 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Feb 2016 11:38:27 +0100 "M.B." <tomboy64@sina.cn> wrote:
> 
>> Hello folks.
>> 
>> While hacking away on a new ebuild I came across the issue that 
>> games.eclass apparently got banned from future use. The only
>> references I was able to dig up (apart from helpful people on
>> IRC), were https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=566498
>> (games.eclass: use of games group needs to be removed wrt
>> 20151011 Council meeting) and 
>> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Quality_Assurance/Meeting_Summar
ies#Games_team_policies_issue
>>
>> 
(A mere deprecation notice).
>> 
>> In contrast, a simple "grep deprec /usr/portage/eclass/" gives
>> numerous deprecation warnings; just games.eclass is not among
>> them.
>> 
>> Please provide some guidance how (community-)developers are
>> supposed to handle games (in particular wrt games.eclass) in the
>> future. This also includes usage of /usr/games/{bin/lib/share}
>> etc.
> 
> For reference, this is the reference decision:
> 
> https://projects.gentoo.org/council/meeting-logs/20151213-summary.txt
>
>  I'm going to open a bug asking games team how they're going to
> proceed.
> 
Please let us know when you do; there are a few Humble Bundle games
I'd like to bring to the tree and I, too, don't have much to go on as
far as guidelines beyond our usual.

- -- 
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C  1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=ek/8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1944 bytes --]

On Sun, 7 Feb 2016 04:13:38 -0800
Daniel Campbell <zlg@gentoo.org> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
> 
> On 02/07/2016 03:09 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Sun, 7 Feb 2016 11:38:27 +0100 "M.B." <tomboy64@sina.cn> wrote:
> >   
> >> Hello folks.
> >> 
> >> While hacking away on a new ebuild I came across the issue that 
> >> games.eclass apparently got banned from future use. The only
> >> references I was able to dig up (apart from helpful people on
> >> IRC), were https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=566498
> >> (games.eclass: use of games group needs to be removed wrt
> >> 20151011 Council meeting) and 
> >> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Quality_Assurance/Meeting_Summar  
> ies#Games_team_policies_issue
> >>
> >>   
> (A mere deprecation notice).
> >> 
> >> In contrast, a simple "grep deprec /usr/portage/eclass/" gives
> >> numerous deprecation warnings; just games.eclass is not among
> >> them.
> >> 
> >> Please provide some guidance how (community-)developers are
> >> supposed to handle games (in particular wrt games.eclass) in the
> >> future. This also includes usage of /usr/games/{bin/lib/share}
> >> etc.  
> > 
> > For reference, this is the reference decision:
> > 
> > https://projects.gentoo.org/council/meeting-logs/20151213-summary.txt
> >
> >  I'm going to open a bug asking games team how they're going to
> > proceed.
> >   
> Please let us know when you do; there are a few Humble Bundle games
> I'd like to bring to the tree and I, too, don't have much to go on as
> far as guidelines beyond our usual.

I'm sorry for replying this late. The relevant bugs are:

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=566498 for games group
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=574080 for paths
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=574082 as tracker for both

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Ian Delaney]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On Sun, 7 Feb 2016 04:13:38 -0800
Daniel Campbell <zlg@gentoo.org> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
> 
> On 02/07/2016 03:09 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Sun, 7 Feb 2016 11:38:27 +0100 "M.B." <tomboy64@sina.cn> wrote:
> >   
>  [...]  
> ies#Games_team_policies_issue
>  [...]  
> (A mere deprecation notice).
>  [...]  
> > 
> > For reference, this is the reference decision:
> > 
> > https://projects.gentoo.org/council/meeting-logs/20151213-summary.txt
> >
> >  I'm going to open a bug asking games team how they're going to
> > proceed.
> >   
> Please let us know when you do; there are a few Humble Bundle games
> I'd like to bring to the tree and I, too, don't have much to go on as
> far as guidelines beyond our usual.
> 
> - -- 
> Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer

It's not just M.B. being confused about this. There appears to be a
spurt of interest by other users to tackle games

- -- 
kind regards

Ian Delaney
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.1
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=/aU1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Daniel Campbell]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 02/08/2016 01:49 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sun, 7 Feb 2016 04:13:38 -0800 Daniel Campbell <zlg@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
> 
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
>> 
>> On 02/07/2016 03:09 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>> On Sun, 7 Feb 2016 11:38:27 +0100 "M.B." <tomboy64@sina.cn>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hello folks.
>>>> 
>>>> While hacking away on a new ebuild I came across the issue
>>>> that games.eclass apparently got banned from future use. The
>>>> only references I was able to dig up (apart from helpful
>>>> people on IRC), were
>>>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=566498 (games.eclass:
>>>> use of games group needs to be removed wrt 20151011 Council
>>>> meeting) and 
>>>> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Quality_Assurance/Meeting_Summ
ar
>>>> 
>> ies#Games_team_policies_issue
>>>> 
>>>> 
>> (A mere deprecation notice).
>>>> 
>>>> In contrast, a simple "grep deprec /usr/portage/eclass/"
>>>> gives numerous deprecation warnings; just games.eclass is not
>>>> among them.
>>>> 
>>>> Please provide some guidance how (community-)developers are 
>>>> supposed to handle games (in particular wrt games.eclass) in
>>>> the future. This also includes usage of
>>>> /usr/games/{bin/lib/share} etc.
>>> 
>>> For reference, this is the reference decision:
>>> 
>>> https://projects.gentoo.org/council/meeting-logs/20151213-summary.tx
t
>>>
>>>
>>> 
I'm going to open a bug asking games team how they're going to
>>> proceed.
>>> 
>> Please let us know when you do; there are a few Humble Bundle
>> games I'd like to bring to the tree and I, too, don't have much
>> to go on as far as guidelines beyond our usual.
> 
> I'm sorry for replying this late. The relevant bugs are:
> 
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=566498 for games group 
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=574080 for paths 
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=574082 as tracker for both
> 
Thanks for the links. I understand games have been the subject of a
lot of 'discussion' on the ML over the past few years. What do you
believe to be some of the main blockers to getting more dev
participation? From what I gather, a decent portion of us play games
on our systems, so it seems reasonable to get more maintainership
spread out. There's a lot of user interest too, as Ian pointed out.

- -- 
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C  1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
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=/tsU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Michał Górny]

Dnia 17 lutego 2016 03:09:18 CET, Daniel Campbell <zlg@gentoo.org> napisał(a):
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>Hash: SHA256
>
>On 02/08/2016 01:49 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> On Sun, 7 Feb 2016 04:13:38 -0800 Daniel Campbell <zlg@gentoo.org>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
>>> 
>>> On 02/07/2016 03:09 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 7 Feb 2016 11:38:27 +0100 "M.B." <tomboy64@sina.cn>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Hello folks.
>>>>> 
>>>>> While hacking away on a new ebuild I came across the issue
>>>>> that games.eclass apparently got banned from future use. The
>>>>> only references I was able to dig up (apart from helpful
>>>>> people on IRC), were
>>>>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=566498 (games.eclass:
>>>>> use of games group needs to be removed wrt 20151011 Council
>>>>> meeting) and 
>>>>>
>https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Quality_Assurance/Meeting_Summ
>ar
>>>>> 
>>> ies#Games_team_policies_issue
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> (A mere deprecation notice).
>>>>> 
>>>>> In contrast, a simple "grep deprec /usr/portage/eclass/"
>>>>> gives numerous deprecation warnings; just games.eclass is not
>>>>> among them.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Please provide some guidance how (community-)developers are 
>>>>> supposed to handle games (in particular wrt games.eclass) in
>>>>> the future. This also includes usage of
>>>>> /usr/games/{bin/lib/share} etc.
>>>> 
>>>> For reference, this is the reference decision:
>>>> 
>>>>
>https://projects.gentoo.org/council/meeting-logs/20151213-summary.tx
>t
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 
>I'm going to open a bug asking games team how they're going to
>>>> proceed.
>>>> 
>>> Please let us know when you do; there are a few Humble Bundle
>>> games I'd like to bring to the tree and I, too, don't have much
>>> to go on as far as guidelines beyond our usual.
>> 
>> I'm sorry for replying this late. The relevant bugs are:
>> 
>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=566498 for games group 
>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=574080 for paths 
>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=574082 as tracker for both
>> 
>Thanks for the links. I understand games have been the subject of a
>lot of 'discussion' on the ML over the past few years. What do you
>believe to be some of the main blockers to getting more dev
>participation? From what I gather, a decent portion of us play games
>on our systems, so it seems reasonable to get more maintainership
>spread out. There's a lot of user interest too, as Ian pointed out.

To answer that, we have to go back a while.

The games team was pretty much formed of two kinds of developers back then. One kind was retired developers, the other kind was developers who did what they cared about and ignored everything and everyone else. Bugs, join requests, complaints, all went ignored and games team kept silent claim to games in gentoo.

So the first Council case against games team was that they did not accept any new members. Or rather, silently ignored join requests. They also ignored inquiries wrt the case and the Council.

The result was that the Council set up someone external to take care of inviting new members, and electing new team lead afterwards. As it could be predicted, nobody wanted to join, or rather be forced into the team they weren't welcome in.

Then the case against policies started. The first abolished myth was games team sole claim to games in gentoo. Where Council pretty much only confirmed that they have no right for that and everyone can maintain game ebuilds without having games team approval or co-maintenance.

The remaining cases you already know.

During the whole process, I don't recall a single reply from games team member. And in the meantime, they continue their silent routine of doing whatever they care about, and ignoring Council requests.

>- -- 
>Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer
>OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net
>fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C  1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v2
>
>iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJWw9ZJAAoJEAEkDpRQOeFwoDcP/2rHwIb1ztpkBOzt0UWh4IYr
>fbKHCi+NJ9p5j7alLQyjIarZgYMY5yLvRWaP+pR9PPyjIhAmEGEI1SoGLQC8MhJ2
>fqOUKr+EH2mt8I4U3EGzsLAMA4JXm1yaKmDcFV3RQett4uUD9MWECQUxrLBQ/cME
>F0kPaBziIAZM30+jBoplTISNW7n4L4a/S6smcUV0XR7vGL3P67UQiD1zQ2LvF2Ny
>Yj4NMk3Z79rYzog0mqNKaSPVR45rEpTPz+BSoxqwt2t117GQP01n3WlKdyOecKuH
>KRyJ90pOnmJVRmH3pLYubJwq0mjvv4YYD1HVVWzK5r30kmVbd5rWrwt/RVGnpkGk
>EI8CdKuiQwXeWjb+X1Jo0kEhs2e5dKRmPM4z2xHv7YCkkshO/aOC51iP75yLnnZS
>8pxp/D61Xdbfbjm8l+0oHJdIJ9qm6Oc5UGohcWU4pk/mTHNutWjKaOAT3D+Rtu7/
>ILCajj5QapXgJUqEZ8YleWD0e/7Ft2AvWaNNgalz4717daIHhk/JBE0WDDv1M3Pe
>+KT4pC9zToAZelwOnQGLZLyccbyLpgqrwsYArgsqBV3uTwgYRCTqEbBDZAx2m994
>0RyxIgF201hsGKp6yIS9X2nQEgZwFrM3XWDckydiQhpFi6ZMxbWsdKZJxVOUVOEf
>JAF0lamHDp2Em+rjKLU7
>=/tsU
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny (by phone)

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Michael Sterrett]

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 2:39 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:

> The games team was pretty much formed of two kinds of developers back then. One kind was retired developers, the other kind was developers who did what they cared about and ignored everything and everyone else. Bugs, join requests, complaints, all went ignored and games team kept silent claim to games in gentoo.

False and slanderous.

> So the first Council case against games team was that they did not accept any new members. Or rather, silently ignored join requests. They also ignored inquiries wrt the case and the Council.

Also false.

> The result was that the Council set up someone external to take care of inviting new members, and electing new team lead afterwards. As it could be predicted, nobody wanted to join, or rather be forced into the team they weren't welcome in.

Speculative and false.

> Then the case against policies started. The first abolished myth was games team sole claim to games in gentoo. Where Council pretty much only confirmed that they have no right for that and everyone can maintain game ebuilds without having games team approval or co-maintenance.

Making things up.


> During the whole process, I don't recall a single reply from games team member.

Well, here's at least one.

However, I'm not sure why anyone would reply to your drama, slander,
and lies so I'm not surprised that's been your experience.

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Michał Górny]

Dnia 17 lutego 2016 08:52:31 CET, Michael Sterrett <mr_bones_@gentoo.org> napisał(a):
>On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 2:39 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org>
>wrote:
>
>> The games team was pretty much formed of two kinds of developers back
>then. One kind was retired developers, the other kind was developers
>who did what they cared about and ignored everything and everyone else.
>Bugs, join requests, complaints, all went ignored and games team kept
>silent claim to games in gentoo.
>
>False and slanderous.
>
>> So the first Council case against games team was that they did not
>accept any new members. Or rather, silently ignored join requests. They
>also ignored inquiries wrt the case and the Council.
>
>Also false.
>
>> The result was that the Council set up someone external to take care
>of inviting new members, and electing new team lead afterwards. As it
>could be predicted, nobody wanted to join, or rather be forced into the
>team they weren't welcome in.
>
>Speculative and false.
>
>> Then the case against policies started. The first abolished myth was
>games team sole claim to games in gentoo. Where Council pretty much
>only confirmed that they have no right for that and everyone can
>maintain game ebuilds without having games team approval or
>co-maintenance.
>
>Making things up.
>
>
>> During the whole process, I don't recall a single reply from games
>team member.
>
>Well, here's at least one.
>
>However, I'm not sure why anyone would reply to your drama, slander,
>and lies so I'm not surprised that's been your experience.

Nice to hear from you. Please don't expect me to write things I didn't know about.

So maybe games team did reply. To the people that were worthy replying to. Did this group include the Council or QA team?

As I see it, this only adds to your case. Ignoring messages is inappropriate at least. Ignoring them in order to stall others from doing their Gentoo work is more serious.



-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny (by phone)

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Denis Dupeyron]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 465 bytes --]

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:

> developers who did what they cared about and ignored everything and
> everyone else.
>

I don't know if I'm an exception to the rule, but I've always had fruitful
interactions with the games team. I never felt they ignored me.


> games team sole claim to games in gentoo.
>

 Not true. I've been maintaining games for a decade and have never been on
the team.

Denis.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1225 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 762 bytes --]

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 08:32:53 -0700
Denis Dupeyron <calchan@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > games team sole claim to games in gentoo.
> >  
> 
>  Not true. I've been maintaining games for a decade and have never been on
> the team.

Quoting the previous documentation of games.eclass, before hasufell
changed it:

# This is the games eclass for standardizing the install of games ...
# you better have a *good* reason why you're *not* using games.eclass
# in a games-* ebuild

And this is just one piece of the puzzle. I don't have time to gather
all other past evidence. Nevertheless, it's just past.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Denis Dupeyron]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 584 bytes --]

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 08:32:53 -0700
> Denis Dupeyron <calchan@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >  Not true. I've been maintaining games for a decade and have never been
> on
> > the team.
>
> Quoting the previous documentation of games.eclass [...]
>

I'm not seeing the connection you make between the documentation of an
eclass and the fact that I have been maintaining games for ten years
without being part of the games team. From here it looks like you're typing
faster than you can read.

Denis.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1021 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1048 bytes --]

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 10:19:24 -0700
Denis Dupeyron <calchan@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 9:22 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 08:32:53 -0700
> > Denis Dupeyron <calchan@gentoo.org> wrote:  
> > >  Not true. I've been maintaining games for a decade and have never been  
> > on  
> > > the team.  
> >
> > Quoting the previous documentation of games.eclass [...]
> >  
> 
> I'm not seeing the connection you make between the documentation of an
> eclass and the fact that I have been maintaining games for ten years
> without being part of the games team. From here it looks like you're typing
> faster than you can read.

I was stating the apparent state of facts. If people are told they're
supposed to go with games team, use their eclass, follow their
policies, that's how it looks to people.

Now, the fact that you had achieved otherwise doesn't mean others felt
forced to adhere to that.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Denis Dupeyron]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 916 bytes --]

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I was stating the apparent state of facts. If people are told they're
> supposed to go with games team, use their eclass, follow their
> policies, that's how it looks to people.


That's an entirely different point from the one I was making. But I'll
entertain you anyway. All teams have rules and enforce them. If I commit,
say, a python package and I don't use the python eclass, I'm sure to get a
bug filed telling me to do so, a python team-member forcing the change on
me if I refuse, this escalating to comrel if I complain or reverse the
change, etc... So why would it be OK for the python team to coerce and not
OK for the games team? In other words, why would the games team have less
right to good housekeeping than the python team? Here python is just an
example, I could have picked any other team.

Denis.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1258 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1300 bytes --]

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 11:08:30 -0700
Denis Dupeyron <calchan@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 10:33 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > I was stating the apparent state of facts. If people are told they're
> > supposed to go with games team, use their eclass, follow their
> > policies, that's how it looks to people.  
> 
> 
> That's an entirely different point from the one I was making. But I'll
> entertain you anyway. All teams have rules and enforce them. If I commit,
> say, a python package and I don't use the python eclass, I'm sure to get a
> bug filed telling me to do so, a python team-member forcing the change on
> me if I refuse, this escalating to comrel if I complain or reverse the
> change, etc... So why would it be OK for the python team to coerce and not
> OK for the games team? In other words, why would the games team have less
> right to good housekeeping than the python team? Here python is just an
> example, I could have picked any other team.

Well, maybe it's because you can talk to Python team, discuss and not
get ignored by them. Unlike games team members who believe it's best to
ignore certain developers. Then QA team. Then the Council.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Denis Dupeyron]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1329 bytes --]

On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> Well, maybe it's because you can talk to Python team, discuss and not
> get ignored by them.


We've already established the same is true for the games team. I'm a living
example of it and I can't imagine I'm the only one.


> Unlike games team members who believe it's best to
> ignore certain developers.


I certainly hope we can still ignore abrasive developers since it's been
proven many times that it's the best way to deal with them.

So, you don't answer my question. Or rather, you answer with a specious
statement. Since you're being unusually shy I will say what you're trying
hard not so say. There are actually first-class projects catered for by
first-class developers, and those can set rules like the mandatory use of
an eclass and actually enforce them. Then there are second-class projects
and developers who can do the same as long as it doesn't bother the
first-class people. Second-class developers, often working quietly and
steadily, not wasting their time on mailing-lists like I just did, can see
their projects trampled over at any time for the mere reason that they were
trying to keep their business in order, just like first-class developers do.

Thank you for the clarification.

Denis.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1869 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2829 bytes --]

On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 18:06:29 -0700
Denis Dupeyron <calchan@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > Well, maybe it's because you can talk to Python team, discuss and not
> > get ignored by them.  
> 
> We've already established the same is true for the games team. I'm a living
> example of it and I can't imagine I'm the only one.

Good for you. So... ignoring majority is fine as long as you can prove
that they don't ignore one of their old fellows. Good.

> > Unlike games team members who believe it's best to
> > ignore certain developers.  
> 
> I certainly hope we can still ignore abrasive developers since it's been
> proven many times that it's the best way to deal with them.
> 
> So, you don't answer my question. Or rather, you answer with a specious
> statement. Since you're being unusually shy I will say what you're trying
> hard not so say. There are actually first-class projects catered for by
> first-class developers, and those can set rules like the mandatory use of
> an eclass and actually enforce them. Then there are second-class projects
> and developers who can do the same as long as it doesn't bother the
> first-class people. Second-class developers, often working quietly and
> steadily, not wasting their time on mailing-lists like I just did, can see
> their projects trampled over at any time for the mere reason that they were
> trying to keep their business in order, just like first-class developers do.

Now you are trivializing the problem. I wasn't talking about mailing
lists. I was talking about explicit questions, requests, pings. Mail,
IRC, Bugzilla.

If you get bug from the Council asking you what to do... don't you
think it would be fair to reply? Of course, you could say 'mgorny
opened the bug, I'm going to ignore him'. But the fact is, this is
not some kind of 'quiet, steady work'.

This is an explicit attempt of ignoring everyone with differing opinion
by delaying things. Sure, you can disagree. But it's different to
discuss disagreements and reach a consensus. And it's different if you
silently ignore disagreeing opinions and make them wait months for
a single reply, hoping to stall them from having any effect whatsoever.

When was the last time games project got a new member? Where is that
'premiere Linux gaming platform'? What about all these users? Why were
we exposing security issues for almost 10 years?

So we're the bad ones in your opinion, troubling the little closed
team. We want to have some influence, bad us. We should just keep quiet
and let us be ordered. Stand out of the line -- and you're a problem,
you're abrasive developer, you should be ignored.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny
<http://dev.gentoo.org/~mgorny/>

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: games.eclass policy

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 826 bytes --]

On Thu, 18 Feb 2016 08:08:48 +0100
Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Feb 2016 18:06:29 -0700
> Denis Dupeyron <calchan@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:  
> > >
> > > Well, maybe it's because you can talk to Python team, discuss and not
> > > get ignored by them.    
> > 
> > We've already established the same is true for the games team. I'm a living
> > example of it and I can't imagine I'm the only one.  
> 
> Good for you. So... ignoring majority is fine as long as you can prove
> that they don't ignore one of their old fellows. Good.

I have never had a problem talking to the games team, and I suspect the same is
true for anyone who isn't just communicating with them to push their agenda.





-- 

[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 951 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: games.eclass policy

[Andreas K. Hüttel]

Am Samstag, 20. Februar 2016, 02:25:08 schrieb Ryan Hill:
> > 
> > Good for you. So... ignoring majority is fine as long as you can prove
> > that they don't ignore one of their old fellows. Good.
> 
> I have never had a problem talking to the games team, and I suspect the
> same is true for anyone who isn't just communicating with them to push
> their agenda.

Sadly that seems to be the case only for a select few.

I have never had any interest in games, but was in the past downright ignored 
with respect to sensible, useful, more and more urgent and while at first 
nice, polite, and respectful, later more and more forthright e-mails and other 
communication attempts regarding other aspects of gentoo. There's a certain 
overlap of persons with the games team involved. 

If you're part of a community you're expected to cooperate with the community 
(and stick to the rules of the community, but that's a different issue).

If you try to ignore everyone with a differing opinion and push your will 
through by just doing whatever you want, at some point you'll be so much in 
the minority that your opinion doesnt count anymore.

-- 
Andreas K. Hüttel
Gentoo Linux developer (council, perl, libreoffice)
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: games.eclass policy

[Alexander Berntsen]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

FWIW, I tried contacting the games team members via IRC and email a
few times over a few years, but never got even a simple "hello" out of
them. So I gave up. And I've heard several similar tales confirmed by
established developers. So maybe they're doing good work in terms of
hacking, but they make poor project leads in my experience.
- -- 
Alexander
bernalex@gentoo.org
https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2

iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJWywsCAAoJENQqWdRUGk8BHxEQAKPG5MsquXRjZuy1CwjuUFtd
x1M7grJT/qga+tN8OVd4VmY3oc2v8RmSraR0ViL262bY1yP4W1Rpb1r0/pvp1Agv
giTz+PmZK3G03RKH0e5wTMfs7qEJY8ed7kMpLKwfFz2bOygjgVnAEvuy7t35/+fZ
yI7okdVUGBx2cBYDuGhBkLspHhiaZLyhxEWPhhYrZUTvGTkIOmsVKs8fFn7UTkm/
LEWEQIpJr3PYGbT8V666P5UhbcXzqN17iSONvoT4MTRh+m9Gwlreak3utL7uTFVI
mj0kKvPy9omDFJZgIzZzr7WrgT6FRBuOuorCuuMeeZgWtC4SpjZX7uQMLbFc0rkV
Xzh2ieLcrx4Xvtoyf0oJDHCHQWm2E8A3KcwijeDSBUm1rlUhWRWRmnT04Seeygci
yirn5zn4VjRgJi9NYoDa/5x2fpoBlmvMS9+Kh3QJOu2E9DpWiIe1X/p5Es0zRjKq
UaBl8jDNEpo01WH0b/BWY9QpEOdJQFkAIA8DAy5XMgD+sE5g0zq8P9GwZai5+Ciw
VMuge5RfXIsDmdRmV+tdGXrHzbnVhjAtR0wSmnPI8MKjUldKVNj0u6TuXKQ0muvs
nvWYo2ZTyg9A52zDo10lE20V90WvmLXwDeEGkDyCDI5MfiuhHva2naF5xplJi+DW
pSt/lfiWkokLZAL/gIGo
=e9p2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] games.eclass policy

[Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov]

17.02.2016 21:32, Denis Dupeyron пишет:
> On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 12:39 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>> developers who did what they cared about and ignored everything and
>> everyone else.
>>
> I don't know if I'm an exception to the rule, but I've always had fruitful
> interactions with the games team. I never felt they ignored me.
And I do (both on bz and IRC).

>> games team sole claim to games in gentoo.
>>
>  Not true. I've been maintaining games for a decade and have never been on
> the team.
And so I. In gamerlay. And then hasufell comes and said something like
that: gamerlay is unneded and just stealing users from games team. And
people should contribute to sunrise=>gentoo, and not in the "3party
overlays with bad review quality".

;)

And, as for me personally, I'm pretty fine with contributing ebuilds,
that I maintain, in overlays, and do not see the point for finishing
quizzes and joining dev teams (anyway, time to time, some developers
taking my ebuilds, editing them to gentoo-tree-quality state and
commiting it to the tree, lol ;) ).