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 26CF51381F3 for ; Sat, 22 Jun 2013 10:39:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CB1DCE09B8; Sat, 22 Jun 2013 10:39:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ve0-f171.google.com (mail-ve0-f171.google.com [209.85.128.171]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE3CCE0996 for ; Sat, 22 Jun 2013 10:39:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ve0-f171.google.com with SMTP id b10so7315653vea.16 for ; Sat, 22 Jun 2013 03:39:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=Af426uWF6AQYiqyjVOaNbS26gTNatU4wYXaqfCWxqcU=; b=lV8hxa2wNTMcMi+AiXHNoH+Gr+2cVMuYuWgy8V3VpTxfJMBqTYhh9tHBh4IFy3jupp d9YjMo/rijPZwynJiKnEnesUbd7nwv0JEPDBcW7CcTB10z43e2d0/0au5F/Qc1/d6x2k Nn4nbtP7RfQvqmBAUfMSO0O/xzjrYk2Yu2udqWjFuTbHlqQoEY3dUWvL+JBq2ZX9KOAO HqCNSjL/WnGVBo17TQeMYuifBf+86ax+cKW4y2ngNWyiWxqZYUMomaZMm/0tph+n4bGs 4WKLdmXZgqhxd4JweefH50RDo+P0i2FufddKyHxLIwBtMGqnO58vooJ4PCo4Cdvg/viz nRWg== 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 X-Received: by 10.220.173.72 with SMTP id o8mr7262924vcz.75.1371897551953; Sat, 22 Jun 2013 03:39:11 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.180.98 with HTTP; Sat, 22 Jun 2013 03:39:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51C57A66.70801@gentoo.org> References: <201306212017.38571.vapier@gentoo.org> <201306212106.31519.vapier@gentoo.org> <51C567F8.6070503@gentoo.org> <51C57A66.70801@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 22 Jun 2013 06:39:11 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: V6c6WX0_jB5kUBCmJsu-xNOGcLM Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Soliciting input for a non-maintainer update (NMU) GLEP From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: e3b496e5-2a6f-4cf2-a147-06fef2b754ae X-Archives-Hash: 0218623495a5a1f65c996ba92c9bed6d On Sat, Jun 22, 2013 at 6:20 AM, Michael Weber wrote: > Bottom line: I think we need more of a culture of mutual trust than a > ton of metadata. > I have to agree with this. The culture should be that we're doing this work FOR GENTOO. Sure, we're getting benefits out of it as well so it should be a win/win, but we're all in this together. I do think there is some metadata that would be useful. Rather than capturing a "keep out" flag, perhaps it would make more sense to capture more "factual" information, like a comment for humans to read, and maybe a status for scripts. This shouldn't be about who is and isn't allowed to touch things, but rather WHY somebody might think twice about touching things. For example, many system packages should get the white glove treatment because they're, well, system packages. I'd like to think that even the greenest of recruits would appreciate that glibc isn't the best package in the world to experiment on, but a script might not catch that. Useful and informative comments to humans might be useful as well. For example, I might mark my package as "do-not-stabilize" for the scripts and add a comment "game client interfaces with external game server that changes API without warning and requires instant updates." Anybody running scripts on the tree should be careful from the start - perhaps we should even require pre-announcement on -dev. Manual changes are less of a risk, especially if there is warning. All that said, I'm not opposed to there being some kind of flag. However, I think we need to set the expectation that this is about helping us all to collaborate better, and not about putting up razorwire. Rich