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 976BB1387FD for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 11:44:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1E964E087C; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 11:44:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vc0-f182.google.com (mail-vc0-f182.google.com [209.85.220.182]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37650E07D0 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 11:44:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vc0-f182.google.com with SMTP id il7so7860028vcb.27 for ; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 04:44:42 -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:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=HH2n8ANIKRy+YVI2whFxOhPb5pow2jfVJvcxv4spq0U=; b=YG0mzsGUMVqEU8IvumQG9jbH0l5PeQmLEDNvMB62jcAdzlXvXdgFbHeQ8wqUOjjSSZ FUEA20wTjBP8k04LQFVyxoXDVXgzzc35nQOsoOYowUHzOVpZzSWrr3QmJRGCoI3rUxkG xRHEeAGA99vrZfeWOs8wqIhMbwtJjVR5/ugRTr5QmQK8gGe5KS5UJ8Gp7F3AAZf49sDg 8XgAV6gGUrldobpet0CVqRrVa5C3YQaNpMHXkWqzViv+TE2MwCm6c57hxNMGqDK/ndXP Ro6WSWe/fzApUiBa9bjfuJE1fyL0ZHdbLfG72nd64HeDZtyArbRFbCaqI4e3U5iWD15r A5oQ== 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 10.221.63.195 with SMTP id xf3mr14358473vcb.36.1402400682465; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 04:44:42 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.30.227 with HTTP; Tue, 10 Jun 2014 04:44:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5396C87C.3040604@gentoo.org> 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> <5396C87C.3040604@gentoo.org> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 07:44:42 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: KJM310ZE59avT4qnqOtkTQJ-GuM Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] The state and future of the OpenRC project From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 808e58d8-d1f8-4ea7-bcae-ae19f29ee375 X-Archives-Hash: 90109341eed495ca4f150a937d2f34e1 On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 4:57 AM, Thomas Kahle wrote: > > 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. I think this is a fairly common issue, actually. Many ebuilds live out in overlays (if they're lucky) or just in bugzilla (if not) simply because they have QA issues that nobody wants to deal with. I've seen ebuilds in bugzilla that get bumped as regularly as anything in the tree. QA can be a double-edged sword. Sometimes it can turn a good ebuild into a great one. At other times it can result in a fair-to-good ebuild leaving the tree entirely. I don't see overlays as a problem though. The main issue I've seen with them is when people make changes to the tree that requires updating reverse dependencies they don't update overlays, and users using overlays can end up being in a broken state for a time. Obviously we can never control whether overlays get updated, but we could require tree-wide updates like this to get announced, instead of just having a tracking bug that only notifies maintainers of impacted packages/etc. That would be more noise though, and likely bikeshedding that those making the changes want to avoid. Or we can just accept that those using overlays will have them break from time to time. Rich