[gentoo-dev] official games repository

[gentoo-dev] official games repository

[hasufell]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

what does the games team think of an official games repository?

These are some arguments for such a repo:
* sunrise does not allow ebuilds when any version is already in the
tree (so no live or beta ebuilds for existing in-tree-games), so that
is not always a real alternative
* easier contribution and reviews
* let people contribute proprietary games ebuilds here which cannot be
added to the tree, because no dev owns the game
* let people contribute alpha/beta/live/experimental ebuilds here
* deprecate repositories like "gamerlay" which do not undergo any kind
of review and have low quality
* some of the work here can directly flow into the tree
* less decentralization of games ebuilds when there is a central
overlay for contribution and testing
* a lot of other herds already practice this workflow with success


Yes, overlays suck. But bugzilla as a review platform sucks more and
IRC is also not the first place people look for.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSY8f5AAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzM9kH/24YQMcxK75ET8xJKNvd764T
XS0Hso0il80OXDHKoypKEW4nbPFum3vLChVQ0OP2fy680oOA/hTIEgw4CVtTV7Ng
bfRiEU27JEh/OEVS/87ETpycjSNFKmmo0cDabze5wkdDeaSZD/agIyKJTFyy6HQb
AXKdi8O6ZNEDT1XbuOyt/IeTyJuyIRse3IN7t+RnhOS6+bJ4CLlo1GQ+hDzBjzl2
8unNl9BWFE2jeNd7maDVjzQhHEa5zxln/jqQHNIbhO0hsHULaLxRwivre0UMcEb6
fF99gKqNkGDp44ZNuGeHE5tHStzEI87mjX+WV6Yk9jv7ONflo76hvGSaGmOfTrY=
=0oVh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 601 bytes --]

Dnia 2013-10-20, o godz. 14:09:29
hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> napisał(a):

> what does the games team think of an official games repository?

$ layman -i games

 * games
 * ~~~~~
 * Source  : svn://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/games
 * Contact : games@gentoo.org
 * Type    : Subversion; Priority: 50
 * Quality : experimental
 * 
 * Description:
 *   A collection of work-in-progress ebuilds and ebuilds which require testing.
 * 
 * Link:
 *   http://games.gentoo.org/
 * 
 * Feed:
 *   http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/games/timeline
 * 

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 966 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[hasufell]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/20/2013 02:15 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Dnia 2013-10-20, o godz. 14:09:29 hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org>
> napisał(a):
> 
>> what does the games team think of an official games repository?
> 
> $ layman -i games
> 
> * games * ~~~~~ * Source  : svn://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/games *
> Contact : games@gentoo.org * Type    : Subversion; Priority: 50 *
> Quality : experimental * * Description: *   A collection of
> work-in-progress ebuilds and ebuilds which require testing. * *
> Link: *   http://games.gentoo.org/ * * Feed: *
> http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/games/timeline *
> 

Go ahead and clone it.

Also, try to send a pull request.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSY8nGAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzLiYH/2cP4kZMrivFieirtiMh8obb
8LA/FfvJO+MTT6mQFiI6n8C59c5sxG7ljYPCyXzYvhFhEyZ1kf6UHW22its3PAnm
OHZnE6v0AWwxpTEj1w/g/Zh/VgtrFVDXdummAUnVGxv+JOsRBFs/Xl+5+S1wst5E
DjRJaZ8y8J7oXzG1/+4HiaB8nW5l77pX+kl1up5WfSyUdvQ+1YD1xEHEhjiRxyu0
OQXWW+Ra+UE/P46ZmkTdzaFECIAY+eAhPqeJnrDIBMw38AstxUjMk5g3XvqJWsPd
ZPaCkVJ43ELh0jPRsKL9KOnCjSrDUyGUfSNLSUNk8d3e1Od3KGBXG5UB1j3QglY=
=PaMb
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим]

Why not use gamerlay then? :D

20.10.2013, 19:17, "hasufell" <hasufell@gentoo.org>:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/20/2013 02:15 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
>>  Dnia 2013-10-20, o godz. 14:09:29 hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org>
>>  napisał(a):
>>>  what does the games team think of an official games repository?
>>  $ layman -i games
>>
>>  * games * ~~~~~ * Source  : svn://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/games *
>>  Contact : games@gentoo.org * Type    : Subversion; Priority: 50 *
>>  Quality : experimental * * Description: *   A collection of
>>  work-in-progress ebuilds and ebuilds which require testing. * *
>>  Link: *   http://games.gentoo.org/ * * Feed: *
>>  http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/games/timeline *
>
> Go ahead and clone it.
>
> Also, try to send a pull request.
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
>
> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSY8nGAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzLiYH/2cP4kZMrivFieirtiMh8obb
> 8LA/FfvJO+MTT6mQFiI6n8C59c5sxG7ljYPCyXzYvhFhEyZ1kf6UHW22its3PAnm
> OHZnE6v0AWwxpTEj1w/g/Zh/VgtrFVDXdummAUnVGxv+JOsRBFs/Xl+5+S1wst5E
> DjRJaZ8y8J7oXzG1/+4HiaB8nW5l77pX+kl1up5WfSyUdvQ+1YD1xEHEhjiRxyu0
> OQXWW+Ra+UE/P46ZmkTdzaFECIAY+eAhPqeJnrDIBMw38AstxUjMk5g3XvqJWsPd
> ZPaCkVJ43ELh0jPRsKL9KOnCjSrDUyGUfSNLSUNk8d3e1Od3KGBXG5UB1j3QglY=
> =PaMb
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[hasufell]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/20/2013 02:19 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote:
> Why not use gamerlay then? :D
> 

* not related to the games team
* no review whatsoever from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there
* low quality
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSY8sQAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzMRQH/RG20ePKLfL3aa3BYhJQgZUb
BCo3X80nyEsOR9AbiSdNvX3jXD+eRBGqcxcafl4DVueLT24quTvzFsCQZbLpZ8CF
sUzRVIZTFBewdCTcxb0GPFrnCPBeI0zyhY/ia7PrdQSK40t6HwLSnk106+yskJx8
ofpvPo55GStwrDRkiMDhodDrYKS2ZUhHNh2a3xzJ1RTVued6z8lmPBesXJ1lYcs0
8SRDzYmb75Cate5BgknCWKswqc0SfZaDPSfqjoGIU9speS8QW/sHObHXD32WXvyo
XVwN/aFY5B6Poeao/0uUr7EXxshz81wosz0QMmsdM02rJqGGrfZby3dZ9mPM/QI=
=SRYL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим]

> * not related to the games team
> * no review whatsoever from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there

It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to back to work on it together with community.

> * low quality
low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low quality of something else?
Anyway, it is fixable too. Just let's start work on it.

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Markos Chandras]

On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote:
>> * not related to the games team
>> * no review whatsoever from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there
> 
> It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to back to work on it together with community.
> 
>> * low quality
> low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low quality of something else?
> Anyway, it is fixable too. Just let's start work on it.
> 
I agree.

It's better to work with the user community and join efforts than having
yet-another-shiny overlay.

-- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer
http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Kent Fredric]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1600 bytes --]

On 21 October 2013 01:09, hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> wrote:

> what does the games team think of an official games repository?
>
> These are some arguments for such a repo:
> * sunrise does not allow ebuilds when any version is already in the
> tree (so no live or beta ebuilds for existing in-tree-games), so that
> is not always a real alternative
> * easier contribution and reviews
> * let people contribute proprietary games ebuilds here which cannot be
> added to the tree, because no dev owns the game
> * let people contribute alpha/beta/live/experimental ebuilds here
> * deprecate repositories like "gamerlay" which do not undergo any kind
> of review and have low quality
> * some of the work here can directly flow into the tree
> * less decentralization of games ebuilds when there is a central
> overlay for contribution and testing
> * a lot of other herds already practice this workflow with success
>
>
> Yes, overlays suck. But bugzilla as a review platform sucks more and
> IRC is also not the first place people look for.
>

I feel most these concerns can be solved by simply migrating the existing
SVN based games overlay to git.

Branches are much less troublesome under git, and ebuilds can be segregated
into branches by relative quality, with mandatory review to escalate the
branch an ebuild is in.

IME, gitifying things greatly reduces barriers to contribution, and the
games svn repo doesn't have the same burdens to migration that gx86 does.

So given that, why not just propose a git migration, and then we can work
on improving the workflow afterwards.


-- 
Kent

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2155 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[hasufell]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/20/2013 04:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote:
>>> * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever from any
>>> dev on ebuilds that get pushed there
>> 
>> It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to back to
>> work on it together with community.
>> 
>>> * low quality
>> low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many lower-quality
>> ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low quality of something
>> else? Anyway, it is fixable too. Just let's start work on it.
>> 
> I agree.
> 
> It's better to work with the user community and join efforts than
> having yet-another-shiny overlay.
> 

Gamerlay is not related to the games team and this thread is not about
gamerlay which is a project that has failed.
I have zero interest to work on gamerlay. It would have to start with
removing direct commit access of users.

This is a question directed to the games team to revive their overlay
and improve workflow (e.g. I have some games ebuilds myself which are
still very experimental/alpha in my personal overlay... I'd migrate
them there).
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSY+lTAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWz08EIAI0nJi+ztLakQF81MItn2E/y
e3ZOcutk5YNrRrByxpduecvtiR2tx2pNc5v5GvFzVFzyJP+d5ZbbORhaz91ZbRoS
y8fCCvt+XjdQ0Q1w/2PnvJklMEzozozz9JbqN5XrDeNhsQEIRXM210gNxQBFAoBw
EBY/+gOuAjtuXo1c2CwM2b6jCg1mnShcqMqgedaUdNcRc8l7t63UuTsYF6/bMRxU
Tw/uhscSo27SGXD5xDP1cbE7Ikauu0NxCrNxYQOgRyZBgBFbtiVsBWv43Tgaqb4r
Ta9q46ALQtdq9ppa+MZH0Ad0bg7x0nXeC1CjtN1chhXGb0zrNxy2edYlYjPio+g=
=2qId
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Markos Chandras]

On 10/20/2013 03:31 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 10/20/2013 04:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote:
>>>> * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever from any
>>>> dev on ebuilds that get pushed there
>>>
>>> It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to back to
>>> work on it together with community.
>>>
>>>> * low quality
>>> low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many lower-quality
>>> ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low quality of something
>>> else? Anyway, it is fixable too. Just let's start work on it.
>>>
>> I agree.
> 
>> It's better to work with the user community and join efforts than
>> having yet-another-shiny overlay.
> 
> 
> Gamerlay is not related to the games team and this thread is not about
> gamerlay which is a project that has failed.
> I have zero interest to work on gamerlay. It would have to start with
> removing direct commit access of users.

This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If you
intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing you are
doing a great work.

> 
> This is a question directed to the games team to revive their overlay
> and improve workflow (e.g. I have some games ebuilds myself which are
> still very experimental/alpha in my personal overlay... I'd migrate
> them there).

Then you shouldn't have CC'd the gentoo-dev if you are not interested in
oppinion of the community


-- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer
http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Mike Gilbert]

On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 8:09 AM, hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> wrote:
> what does the games team think of an official games repository?
> ...
> Yes, overlays suck. But bugzilla as a review platform sucks more and
> IRC is also not the first place people look for.

I think having an overlay which is reviewed for quality is a good
idea. What would the workflow (for both reviewers and contributors)
look like?

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[hasufell]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/20/2013 04:40 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 10/20/2013 03:31 PM, hasufell wrote:
>> On 10/20/2013 04:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>>> On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote:
>>>>> * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever from
>>>>> any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there
>>>> 
>>>> It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to back
>>>> to work on it together with community.
>>>> 
>>>>> * low quality
>>>> low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many
>>>> lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low quality
>>>> of something else? Anyway, it is fixable too. Just let's
>>>> start work on it.
>>>> 
>>> I agree.
>> 
>>> It's better to work with the user community and join efforts
>>> than having yet-another-shiny overlay.
>> 
>> 
>> Gamerlay is not related to the games team and this thread is not
>> about gamerlay which is a project that has failed. I have zero
>> interest to work on gamerlay. It would have to start with 
>> removing direct commit access of users.
> 
> This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If
> you intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing
> you are doing a great work.
> 

I am not sure if you have read my list of arguments in the first post.
Sunrise is based on that very concept. No user has direct commit
access to the reviewed repository, for good reason (not sure what you
mean with "developer-only").
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSY/UpAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWznLUH/iwVCHBl//wXhSTGzAiOPq/P
UGwjOoFKBuS4BeElSjTc3QbBWGITy7Wy0kzoa6R8rJAA+eU0AMa/w/QvCDIgGybR
SmYrUgdE0MqPVQHDhlbs8TFE8JGZ6TRM5M3z2GJUapucOsyIuiSOY9rYsiIreD19
fuwqdmrH3sGnd/WEZJSgBQYkVfWw9hQgBnRwf7HSVMiy0+0RD4QZ1vHcPHm4KjYw
bfRWDuVtIq37hryAIBe9vcGqEZe/lWeyeaUBPFV+0CpXCt54VoJHVI6UVYFFlsZP
wubM5zBtEaHs6vE+bGtMcjTf5ljhddbLZMq/ZsMTqYuUC87cKnUKm3Co2k3lnTk=
=JOYj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[hasufell]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/20/2013 05:00 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 8:09 AM, hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org>
> wrote:
>> what does the games team think of an official games repository? 
>> ... Yes, overlays suck. But bugzilla as a review platform sucks
>> more and IRC is also not the first place people look for.
> 
> I think having an overlay which is reviewed for quality is a good 
> idea. What would the workflow (for both reviewers and
> contributors) look like?
> 

I personally would propose the standard github way.

The only thing that still bothers me about that is that there is no
automatic way of doing a "repoman full" check, like the travis hooks
on github.

A lot of people get trivial things wrong and automizing a reject with
links to devmanual/wiki etc. on how to get it right would make things
easier.

An alternative would probably be gerrit which vapier seems to be a fan
of. But we don't even have an ebuild.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSY/UwAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzm/MIAJTmPJqUMN4Do4McRNhDxH6X
L4Q90caIHnvhVkuQ4UCbbCqAVEHo4CJOiHuaFtb59D64yuaWcFBEDdDrfz44nHLj
ysaDwqUeTkHTkIq9bHibp+4s6fA7Qk0OEjZ+M1FuNDc/KOC86k0ka/IKs+l34+gH
+tsVkPWvdBllb60u38EZakwuTBIgLQX4bK8MO80YTo0EmgmpWVBZUFfcWrbzx2Zb
aZyxNy4KT3GjOLxPdejRu1+e0fkT9JcV6AEmvJj9ZHV9Hxrnssn0FsoTny3Ah2tj
LY9sVTxzJThCTtLUK6oRJMupX4V1YIpZmGqlBpTk/xypE7wFUacVP00vADx/6CU=
=Lg8u
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Markos Chandras]

On 10/20/2013 04:22 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 10/20/2013 04:40 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> On 10/20/2013 03:31 PM, hasufell wrote:
>>> On 10/20/2013 04:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>>>> On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote:
>>>>>> * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever from
>>>>>> any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there
>>>>>
>>>>> It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to back
>>>>> to work on it together with community.
>>>>>
>>>>>> * low quality
>>>>> low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many
>>>>> lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low quality
>>>>> of something else? Anyway, it is fixable too. Just let's
>>>>> start work on it.
>>>>>
>>>> I agree.
>>>
>>>> It's better to work with the user community and join efforts
>>>> than having yet-another-shiny overlay.
>>>
>>>
>>> Gamerlay is not related to the games team and this thread is not
>>> about gamerlay which is a project that has failed. I have zero
>>> interest to work on gamerlay. It would have to start with 
>>> removing direct commit access of users.
> 
>> This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If
>> you intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing
>> you are doing a great work.
> 
> 
> I am not sure if you have read my list of arguments in the first post.
> Sunrise is based on that very concept. No user has direct commit
> access to the reviewed repository, for good reason (not sure what you
> mean with "developer-only").
>

I was mainly referring to your way to exluding this community which is
already working on the gaming side of Gentoo. You shouldn't ignore
active contributors because their ebuilds happen to be of lower quality.
It would be nice if you could try to actually talk to them and find a
way to make them contribute to your new overlay otherwise you may end up
actually be the only maintainer of it.

-- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[hasufell]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/20/2013 05:26 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
> On 10/20/2013 04:22 PM, hasufell wrote:
>> On 10/20/2013 04:40 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>>> On 10/20/2013 03:31 PM, hasufell wrote:
>>>> On 10/20/2013 04:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>>>>> On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote:
>>>>>>> * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever
>>>>>>> from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to
>>>>>> back to work on it together with community.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> * low quality
>>>>>> low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many 
>>>>>> lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low
>>>>>> quality of something else? Anyway, it is fixable too.
>>>>>> Just let's start work on it.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> I agree.
>>>> 
>>>>> It's better to work with the user community and join
>>>>> efforts than having yet-another-shiny overlay.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Gamerlay is not related to the games team and this thread is
>>>> not about gamerlay which is a project that has failed. I have
>>>> zero interest to work on gamerlay. It would have to start
>>>> with removing direct commit access of users.
>> 
>>> This is not a great way to invite more users to participate.
>>> If you intend to make the game overlay and team a
>>> developer-only thing you are doing a great work.
>> 
>> 
>> I am not sure if you have read my list of arguments in the first
>> post. Sunrise is based on that very concept. No user has direct
>> commit access to the reviewed repository, for good reason (not
>> sure what you mean with "developer-only").
>> 
> 
> I was mainly referring to your way to exluding this community which
> is already working on the gaming side of Gentoo. You shouldn't
> ignore active contributors because their ebuilds happen to be of
> lower quality.


Thanks for your opinion on this. It's nice to see that my efforts of
(unrequested) reviews on bugzilla, overlays, forums and sunrise makes
you say that I ignore contributors. Especially those contributors who
respond to or even request reviews (many don't even respond to
unrequested reviews).

Some people from gamerlay have made clear that they are not really
interested in reviews, yet you want me to waste time on that?

I don't think this discussion leads anywhere.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSY/l+AAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzulQIAKa4qBEE62Zxta3Lv2dB5sHr
JoBJiOQbX0S2SfmeZSUg4OCkyKzSRyxIXhS+3X86AwkYR/TWcc7a4pwaQvYlUIjz
YA2HRFY00AWVjNzgYRmwYaggRsJ6TI8iIsNXnWEYkB+TVHrlewwwJn+hNF4ELD25
fNsHTxduY8yFiPTgYSKvp84xAC0SVGds4xc5WOITuYngRp5sdq0SELr5JSOjw6tR
qbrQ79eG4vB+j2ye0zG1BoXtKP2uaP0cSIjPL6OvzXCX4+l27czrp6akHYihFsZz
+i2JfGN5XGpEi3l6AFVD8VZi0/oUwSR/d6bKoo+crLBhS+29MzFfYuS/Ob7hrfg=
=3rmu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Mike Gilbert]

On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 11:40 AM, hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 10/20/2013 05:26 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>> On 10/20/2013 04:22 PM, hasufell wrote:
>>> On 10/20/2013 04:40 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>>>> On 10/20/2013 03:31 PM, hasufell wrote:
>>>>> On 10/20/2013 04:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote:
>>>>>>>> * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever
>>>>>>>> from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to
>>>>>>> back to work on it together with community.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> * low quality
>>>>>>> low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many
>>>>>>> lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low
>>>>>>> quality of something else? Anyway, it is fixable too.
>>>>>>> Just let's start work on it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree.
>>>>>
>>>>>> It's better to work with the user community and join
>>>>>> efforts than having yet-another-shiny overlay.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Gamerlay is not related to the games team and this thread is
>>>>> not about gamerlay which is a project that has failed. I have
>>>>> zero interest to work on gamerlay. It would have to start
>>>>> with removing direct commit access of users.
>>>
>>>> This is not a great way to invite more users to participate.
>>>> If you intend to make the game overlay and team a
>>>> developer-only thing you are doing a great work.
>>>
>>>
>>> I am not sure if you have read my list of arguments in the first
>>> post. Sunrise is based on that very concept. No user has direct
>>> commit access to the reviewed repository, for good reason (not
>>> sure what you mean with "developer-only").
>>>
>>
>> I was mainly referring to your way to exluding this community which
>> is already working on the gaming side of Gentoo. You shouldn't
>> ignore active contributors because their ebuilds happen to be of
>> lower quality.
>
>
> Thanks for your opinion on this. It's nice to see that my efforts of
> (unrequested) reviews on bugzilla, overlays, forums and sunrise makes
> you say that I ignore contributors. Especially those contributors who
> respond to or even request reviews (many don't even respond to
> unrequested reviews).
>
> Some people from gamerlay have made clear that they are not really
> interested in reviews, yet you want me to waste time on that?
>
> I don't think this discussion leads anywhere.

He's just warning you not to ignore the existing community in your
attempt to create a new community project. It is good advice; take it
that way instead of responding to it as negative criticism.

I think it might be a tough sell to get existing gamerlay contributors
to switch to this new "official" contribution process. If you started
working within that community, you may have better luck persuading
people to get on board. If you have no interest in doing that, just be
aware that you are excluding a significant base of contributors.

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Markos Chandras]

On 10/20/2013 04:40 PM, hasufell wrote:
> 
> Some people from gamerlay have made clear that they are not really
> interested in reviews, yet you want me to waste time on that?

A guy asked you why you don't work in the gamerlay. All you said was
that gamerlay was a failed attemp and that you have zero interest in
working in it. No futher explanations. And now, finally, after 4 e-mails
you decided to tell us that you have actually talked to them and they
are not interested in ebuild reviewing. Ok then...

> 
> I don't think this discussion leads anywhere.
> 
I am not sure why you even open that thread. Your e-mail basically
requests the games@ team opinion. Again, if you didn't want others to
comment on this, you shouldn't have CC'd gentoo-dev.

-- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Markos Chandras]

On 10/20/2013 05:04 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 20, 2013 at 11:40 AM, hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> On 10/20/2013 05:26 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>>> On 10/20/2013 04:22 PM, hasufell wrote:
>>>> On 10/20/2013 04:40 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>>>>> On 10/20/2013 03:31 PM, hasufell wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/20/2013 04:13 PM, Markos Chandras wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/20/2013 01:26 PM, Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим wrote:
>>>>>>>>> * not related to the games team * no review whatsoever
>>>>>>>>> from any dev on ebuilds that get pushed there
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is easy-fixable. It is enough to gentoo-games team to
>>>>>>>> back to work on it together with community.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> * low quality
>>>>>>>> low quality of what? ebuilds? I bet, it is many
>>>>>>>> lower-quality ebuilds in the tree. Or do you mean low
>>>>>>>> quality of something else? Anyway, it is fixable too.
>>>>>>>> Just let's start work on it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I agree.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's better to work with the user community and join
>>>>>>> efforts than having yet-another-shiny overlay.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gamerlay is not related to the games team and this thread is
>>>>>> not about gamerlay which is a project that has failed. I have
>>>>>> zero interest to work on gamerlay. It would have to start
>>>>>> with removing direct commit access of users.
>>>>
>>>>> This is not a great way to invite more users to participate.
>>>>> If you intend to make the game overlay and team a
>>>>> developer-only thing you are doing a great work.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am not sure if you have read my list of arguments in the first
>>>> post. Sunrise is based on that very concept. No user has direct
>>>> commit access to the reviewed repository, for good reason (not
>>>> sure what you mean with "developer-only").
>>>>
>>>
>>> I was mainly referring to your way to exluding this community which
>>> is already working on the gaming side of Gentoo. You shouldn't
>>> ignore active contributors because their ebuilds happen to be of
>>> lower quality.
>>
>>
>> Thanks for your opinion on this. It's nice to see that my efforts of
>> (unrequested) reviews on bugzilla, overlays, forums and sunrise makes
>> you say that I ignore contributors. Especially those contributors who
>> respond to or even request reviews (many don't even respond to
>> unrequested reviews).
>>
>> Some people from gamerlay have made clear that they are not really
>> interested in reviews, yet you want me to waste time on that?
>>
>> I don't think this discussion leads anywhere.
> 
> He's just warning you not to ignore the existing community in your
> attempt to create a new community project. It is good advice; take it
> that way instead of responding to it as negative criticism.
> 
> I think it might be a tough sell to get existing gamerlay contributors
> to switch to this new "official" contribution process. If you started
> working within that community, you may have better luck persuading
> people to get on board. If you have no interest in doing that, just be
> aware that you are excluding a significant base of contributors.
> 
Thanks for explaining what I was trying to say :) Seems like there are
people who understand what I am saying and I am not talking nonsense :)

-- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Мисбах-Соловьёв Вадим]

> Some people from gamerlay have made clear that they are not really
> interested in reviews, yet you want me to waste time on that?

I bet, you misunderstand that position. It is a big difference between «users is not interested in review» and «users is not interested to follow the way like «some gentoo developers» maintain their projects.

Actually, I told many times already: let's discuss the suggestions to change the policy to work on gamerlay. Make suggestions. Make discussions.

I personally too very like github-like model. I personally very like an idea to review idea to review commits. But let's don't forget, that we're community. Let's use Do-cracy.

But on the other hand I don't even have time to finish ebuild quiz, no mention to change gamerlay behaviour in single person right now.

Also, back to that conversation: Despite I like an idea of reviewing commits to gamerlay, I disagree with that you proposition that "all stuff should go to the sunrise".

And also, as I already mentioned, I keep all the staff (including games) that I don't want to be reviewed in my own overlay (btw, despite of that, sometimes I find my ebuilds commited to the tree with little changes). And I even position it (my overlay) like the sandbox, not the workplace.

And I also suggested to make gamerlay to be a community-sandbox for games, where developers can get game ebuilds to commit them to the tree (maybe, after some refinement). And that way worked some time. But then I noticed that you have become negative about gamerlay as the essence.


So, once again: sugesst! discuss! let's do!

P.S. Also, actually, that conversation (which, I guess, makes you talking about refusing reviews by gamerlay people) was under the impression of maintenance of some other (non-game-related) part, so, may be you took on your accoun some arguments not directed to you, but for some unnamed "somebody".

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[hasufell]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

This thread is derailed and I have no further interest in discussing here.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSZAD3AAoJEFpvPKfnPDWztwMIAKT0q2I/UOfBip5RCpTpdOdu
d6y38qIKbbEZPBjpe1tH3s5nqavOnYDcRlE00brUZXI4x2qa58acbdU9xeWNJFts
qXKAZHl6txAE+upqewE1MrZXm6qf7toUHVAs2i4pw9rKdb9c5rWdUNk2MiPNKzr5
9FmsfcBL+8y3psnrV3aZNrjuJRSkY01Q87PHcNxvPE+EbqNbBMGFP1VRTnyCCF8X
9J4Rh9beFKZnERnVBPhfz6jaw9YKis+TlJQtuqXopUQQgNHvkC0LgvzxynyFyXEj
I5XT4I/M0frPeUpATHfdMJF+GO9h9GVc0kQrFwWaZC9bIPF1/i2k+EyGwHq6+oY=
=q2JZ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Andreas K. Huettel]

Am Sonntag, 20. Oktober 2013, 18:12:39 schrieb hasufell:
> This thread is derailed and I have no further interest in discussing here.

Well maybe others do now?

http://cdn.meme.li/i/p77qn.jpg

-- 

Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer 
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[hasufell]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 10/20/2013 06:52 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 20. Oktober 2013, 18:12:39 schrieb hasufell:
>> This thread is derailed and I have no further interest in
>> discussing here.
> 
> Well maybe others do now?
> 
> http://cdn.meme.li/i/p77qn.jpg
> 

https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council/Code_of_conduct
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSZA9nAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzgogH/A3U90r/VKHFNjoUZhpe9P7z
V5PP4e9jYjJ4YF6Z1SJJ9Pfawqp9h3RV8FU+RlMhDgqTKAsqXe1IDKtGPntGU9uD
TqIZeQh7XRdTNgztv4wV9Rnfcp94rgWitb2s4u+DcV31XR8xuYc6OtJUErJ4mey8
DeNsLSbZYbAsi100/yi+yhCtZXEnzgRbwdMEo/AgedzXrF1xJwMVqndkXNpCtub8
xlE87zMFm2rUxJhrKWK7ddPE8lHf8WCn8OXBmzPUai6axa1hoscHnHOpbH2K+sVf
LjJ+TRDD9DilxbNJBkUaCSI7YLpjjZ1xTypP7w9DNi5vHWK8Z2RbfFnJ1CXt2eI=
=YZjL
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Tom Wijsman]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, 20 Oct 2013 18:12:39 +0200
hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> wrote:

> This thread is derailed ...

The argument << deprecate repositories like "gamerlay" which do not
undergo any kind of review and have low quality >> you gave causes a sub
thread that tests the reality of that argument, that is to be expected.

It however is in no way derailing the thread; because you effectively
propose to "deprecate" it as well as highlight certain aspects to it,
if you drop your position we can all agree and no further discuss it.

Since this is a repository with 41 contributors of which 6 Gentoo
Developers, there are definitely people whom have spend a lot of work
there [1] and there are users whom use this work on a daily or weekly.

If these people want to commit and not uphold high quality standards;
just let them do that, there is no need for review in that repository.

There is an alternative solution here; and that is to bring reviewed
versions of them to the Portage tree or official games repository, and
honor their contributions. That is a win-win situation for both of you.

Don't fight overlays, but use them in the community's favor.

 [1]: Top 10 contributors and count of commits.

    169 Author: Azamat H. Hackimov <azamat.hackimov@gmail.com>
    150 Author: Marcel Unbehaun <frostworks@gmx.de>
    123 Author: Christian Schmitt <chris@ilovelinux.de>
     99 Author: Marcel Unbehaun <marcel@frostworx.de>
     85 Author: Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov <mva@mva.name>
     80 Author: Locke Shinseiko <wizzleby@gmail.com>
     45 Author: Nikoli <nikoli@lavabit.com>
     32 Author: krytzz <krytzz@soylent.eu>
     29 Author: Mario Kicherer <dev@kicherer.org>
     20 Author: Romain Perier <mrpouet@gentoo.org>

Please consider that some of these people contribute in other places,
want to become Gentoo Developers or actually do want to receive review.

- -- 
With kind regards,

Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer

E-mail address  : TomWij@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key  : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2  ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSZFh1AAoJEJWyH81tNOV9vA8IALifLD5jZD0LPmlrgfn/omAW
oxFM3B76oTcX7ALfwEZiq/vRyUmFC3aYZcf76CEJDd4ZYFm2ZCthPoeMHHHjtBwS
Sr/E1+ZvpvPr8VNIhu8XEAuE/dm/+t5DpezKa2nYF8LVG41+N7RRPGzlJ/d4/LGF
TXbCE4c8+ZTREFYLJdDIPp0kiyi7xNWM6KmVBJL678FWc4x6zAAEcmSk2OjUoz7h
HVLnrP1pDlVE04XcSHqCfM8WAUzJ7p6a7sQipnuiNZF7Hoxa8k6MSrEidjamt8ET
H1goNipOvBC96pG/A3/MP4lAtR01n36i2jYoVQLZKhvKssVMCORFeLcS5Uv1jbI=
=I7ia
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Tom Wijsman]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sun, 20 Oct 2013 17:22:24 +0200
hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I personally would propose the standard github way.
> 
> The only thing that still bothers me about that is that there is no
> automatic way of doing a "repoman full" check, like the travis hooks
> on github.

If you want this to happen; I have previously wrote something which
posts issues, pull requests and commits to an IRC channel, this uses the
GitHub API and can be adapted into running `git ... ; repoman full`
upon a pull request being made.

The only thing left to do is posting the result back; I'm not sure if
commenting on GitHub can be automated, but if we can't do that then a
webpage which gives an overview of it is an alternative solution.

> A lot of people get trivial things wrong and automizing a reject with
> links to devmanual/wiki etc. on how to get it right would make things
> easier.

+1

Should we bring this to repoman under the form of a --learn parameter?

> An alternative would probably be gerrit which vapier seems to be a fan
> of. But we don't even have an ebuild.

Since I have just noticed this is Java, CC-ed us on the bug and this is
on my list; but given its size, I can't make any promises as to when we
will have the whole ebuild set made. I hope for it to be maintainable...

- -- 
With kind regards,

Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer

E-mail address  : TomWij@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key  : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2  ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJSZFyUAAoJEJWyH81tNOV9LbYH/AndndFvFj34C2fuGebmBA/1
GBnRdlCUcXZD5nsfxYb5YRLWi3sRV5bXSTWirbqLyNF+sG13JpJ2/I4UJ3k+TKzQ
L7ASDo+HmvigbU88PW3imucoj5FkPT3ZpklNYafLVU79BAzU9TSiCVBlrLAa+YM7
fB2GXG0evBOKm38QEDcBa0HJZbeppU0QOs48i6mke16nt5mPZpXamMFxnkTjpMZS
W4U0VBeZmqOp//rIIS8TdHXm5+96LxUOEd7Rm9cS6124PxywfN9nX/iYNK7LpX02
mkcH5ie/w+s4njLbb5vf222E9MxjrLeqBjj6aEbd7ke7ZZIilxSxuZQ0zHRMmI4=
=XRY4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

[gentoo-dev] Re: official games repository

[Michael Palimaka]

On 21/10/2013 09:43, Tom Wijsman wrote:
>> An alternative would probably be gerrit which vapier seems to be a fan
>> of. But we don't even have an ebuild.
>
> Since I have just noticed this is Java, CC-ed us on the bug and this is
> on my list; but given its size, I can't make any promises as to when we
> will have the whole ebuild set made. I hope for it to be maintainable...

Gerrit is a nice idea, but infra has previously expressed that they are 
not interested in touching java stuff.

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Peter Stuge]

Markos,

Markos Chandras wrote:
> This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If you
> intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing you
> are doing a great work.

Everything in the Gentoo project is per definition strictly
developer-only. I suppose that it's a function of having the
project centered around a foundation.

I understand that it is very easy to get tunnel vision once one
is "in", but please do remember that Gentoo is quite explicitly
exclusionist.

In some ways I think this is a really good thing. In other ways it's
mind-numbingly restrictive. I do not pretend to have a solution to
the problem that would make everyone happy. I don't think that such
a solution can be found actually :) because different people require
diametrically opposed things in order to be happy.

Anyway, don't forget how the project works. Users can make themselves
heard on mailing lists and in (most) IRC channels, but that is it.

We are absolutely second-class citizens in the Gentoo community and
transcending that class divide is anything but quick and easy.


//Peter

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Peter Stuge]

Tom Wijsman wrote:
> There is an alternative solution here; and that is to bring reviewed
> versions of them to the Portage tree or official games repository, and
> honor their contributions. That is a win-win situation for both of you.

I'm afraid that's too naive. :\

I have significant experience from contributors in several other
projects who aren't interested in higher quality standards than
their own. They will infallably find a way to continue their work
as they see fit, with the case in point being gamerlay.

Someone interested in maintaining higher standards will need to
maintain such higher standards on their own, experience shows that
zero percent of that effort is absorbed by those contributors who are
content with lower standards - they more or less explicitly state
that they do not want to learn how to attain higher quality.

Unless one has actually been in this position I think it may be
difficult to understand how extremely demotivating it is to keep
cleaning up after people who do not want to learn. It is neither
sustainable for a single person nor for a team.

If there's infrastructure to support it I'm strongly in favor of
letting everyone do what they like to do, a sort of live and let
live.

The question is why high quality would matter. If there is a use
case then I think it may be quite worthwhile to have an official,
high quality, games overlay being worked on. I wouldn't spend a
second on it personally, but that's just because I don't play games. :)


//Peter

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Rich Freeman]

On Mon, Oct 21, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Peter Stuge <peter@stuge.se> wrote:
> Markos,
>
> Markos Chandras wrote:
>> This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If you
>> intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing you
>> are doing a great work.
>
> Everything in the Gentoo project is per definition strictly
> developer-only. I suppose that it's a function of having the
> project centered around a foundation.

I can't think of any reason that the Foundation would have anything to
do with who can and cannot participate in anything related to Gentoo.

Gentoo projects have involved non-developers from time to time.  The
documentation project even gives commit access to non-developers, and
arch testers have elevated privileges in bugzilla.

The way our current portage tree is set up basically forces us into an
all-or-nothing security model for commit access - we don't have layers
of integration testing to protect users from errors or abuses.

Proxy maintainership is one way around this.  I think there are many
here who would love to see more non-developer contribution.
Suggestions are always welcome, and those willing to put in effort to
make the suggestions happen are probably even more welcome.  Moving to
git certainly won't hurt, but that won't automatically change anything
either.

Rich

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Peter Stuge]

Rich Freeman wrote:
> >> This is not a great way to invite more users to participate. If you
> >> intend to make the game overlay and team a developer-only thing you
> >> are doing a great work.
> >
> > Everything in the Gentoo project is per definition strictly
> > developer-only. I suppose that it's a function of having the
> > project centered around a foundation.
> 
> I can't think of any reason that the Foundation would have anything to
> do with who can and cannot participate in anything related to Gentoo.

The reason I had in mind is indeed the all-or-nothing security model
for the publications (ebuilds is what I had in mind, I should have
written "Everything I know in the Gentoo project...", sorry about that!)
where even Copyright seems to have to be assigned to the foundation.


> Gentoo projects have involved non-developers from time to time.  The
> documentation project even gives commit access to non-developers,

Awesome! I'm really glad that I was wrong about that - but at the
same time documentation tends to serve a bootstrapping function,
and thus matter less over time.


> and arch testers have elevated privileges in bugzilla.

I should have included bugzilla among mailing lists+IRC, users can
indeed also have elevated privileges on IRC, but never equal to
developers. It is radical exclusion and I'm reminded of it every
time the #gentoo-dev channel mode catches my eye, painfully so if
there's a discussion I could perhaps contribute to. Most of the time
it is easy enough to say something privately to a relevant developer,
but that's still very different from actual participation.


> The way our current portage tree is set up basically forces us into an
> all-or-nothing security model for commit access - we don't have layers
> of integration testing to protect users from errors or abuses.
> 
> Proxy maintainership is one way around this.

I considered mentioning it but I didn't because I think it's clear to
everyone that it is indeed a workaround.


> I think there are many here who would love to see more non-developer
> contribution.

Yes, I am absolutely sure that this is the case!

But even though my blanket statement was incorrect, I guess the fact
that I was wrong about this even after using Gentoo fairly actively
for nearly 10 years means that it is not so clear to users if they
can actually contribute in easy ways, and partially hostile
documentation of course doesn't help.


> Suggestions are always welcome, and those willing to put in effort
> to make the suggestions happen are probably even more welcome.

I for one consider the portage tree and the tools around it to be
Gentoo's core value so I think writes to it becoming more accessible
is the number one suggestion.


> Moving to git certainly won't hurt, but that won't automatically
> change anything either.

I disagree there - it automatically changes what is effortlessly
doable thanks to existence of helpful tooling and it also changes
intuitive expectations as far as workflow goes.

I do think that a world-writable Gerrit instance in front of a
portage git tree will actually suffice to dramatically increase
user participation - and of course bring significant developer
review workload along with it! :)

Everyone knows I'd like to see that happen, and I know that it is
being worked on - I'm not in a hurry, but even so you're right that
it still does not change the fact that only developers can submit
commits from Gerrit into portage.

As I already wrote I think there are both significant pros and cons
to the developer-only approach, and because of how powerful and
flexible Gentoo is there's no easy solution.

As a case in point, TomWij made a mistake for an arch he rarely if
ever uses. Gentoo is complex and also wonderful, and that means that
contributing in the general case is not very easy.

Simplifying the common case of x86/amd64 revbump (a world-writable Gerrit)
will lead to more contribution, but what about the corner cases - it's
impossible to know if I've actually tested my new ebuild on hppa if I
just copypaste the old ebuild. I shouldn't need to communicate my
testing out-of-band in a bugzilla or whatever and a thought I just
had is that KEYWORDS may perhaps need higher temporal resolution than
existing once per file.ebuild.. OTOH I don't think it's a good idea
to require post-processing of the entire gentoo-x86 worktree to make
it usable for portage. Tricky.


//Peter

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Sergey Popov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 547 bytes --]

20.10.2013 18:31, hasufell пишет:
> Gamerlay is not related to the games team

I am sorry, but it is games team not related to gamerlay. No offense,
but gamerlay guys sometims just do their job.

So, MAKE it related to Games team and fix stuff, considered broken.

> gamerlay which is a project that has failed.

Please, do not throw such sentences without objective clarification, thanks.

> I have zero interest to work on gamerlay.

So, this is your personal attitude to be against of gamerlay. We have
got this, thanks.


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 555 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Sergey Popov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 612 bytes --]

20.10.2013 19:22, hasufell пишет:
> I am not sure if you have read my list of arguments in the first post.
> Sunrise is based on that very concept. No user has direct commit
> access to the reviewed repository, for good reason (not sure what you
> mean with "developer-only").
> 

So, what's the problem about adding such reviewed repo(more specifically
- a branch) to gamerlay except your personal negative attitude to whole
project itself?

-- 
Best regards, Sergey Popov
Gentoo developer
Gentoo Desktop Effects project lead
Gentoo Qt project lead
Gentoo Proxy maintainers project lead


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 555 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Sergey Popov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 601 bytes --]

20.10.2013 20:12, hasufell пишет:
> This thread is derailed and I have no further interest in discussing here.
> 

And again, no offense, but it is not the first time when you are jumped,
said, "Everything in X is wrong!" and then said "I have lost interest".
It is very "mature" position to propose enhancement and then - hides, do
not you think?

Sorry if i am saying harsh words, just talking how it looks like from
side view.

-- 
Best regards, Sergey Popov
Gentoo developer
Gentoo Desktop Effects project lead
Gentoo Qt project lead
Gentoo Proxy maintainers project lead


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 555 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] OT: user-developer/privileges in IRC

[Sergey Popov]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1252 bytes --]

22.10.2013 07:19, Peter Stuge пишет:
> I should have included bugzilla among mailing lists+IRC, users can
> indeed also have elevated privileges on IRC, but never equal to
> developers. It is radical exclusion and I'm reminded of it every
> time the #gentoo-dev channel mode catches my eye, painfully so if
> there's a discussion I could perhaps contribute to. Most of the time
> it is easy enough to say something privately to a relevant developer,
> but that's still very different from actual participation.
> 

Yes, and i think that it was done for a reason. But nobody stops you
from requesting temporarily voice on #gentoo-dev and when you
contributions will be marked as significant - gentoo/contributor cloak,
that will give you permanent voice in #gentoo-dev.

You should understand that #gentoo-dev is channel for developer's
communication primarily and it is not so restricted, as you think.

For example, #gentoo-infra is totally restricted to developers only,
other interested parties should be added to channel ACLs explicitly or
should get invite there.


-- 
Best regards, Sergey Popov
Gentoo developer
Gentoo Desktop Effects project lead
Gentoo Qt project lead
Gentoo Proxy maintainers project lead


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 555 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Tom Wijsman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3143 bytes --]

On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 04:10:36 +0200
Peter Stuge <peter@stuge.se> wrote:

> Tom Wijsman wrote:
> > There is an alternative solution here; and that is to bring reviewed
> > versions of them to the Portage tree or official games repository,
> > and honor their contributions. That is a win-win situation for both
> > of you.
> 
> I'm afraid that's too naive. :\

Why? I'm afraid you have misread what I wrote; or, maybe we're not
thinking on the same wave length about this.

Gentoo Developers already do this work constantly; when they bring in
new ebuilds from Bugzilla, review proxied maintainer's work, ...

> I have significant experience from contributors in several other
> projects who aren't interested in higher quality standards than
> their own. They will infallably find a way to continue their work
> as they see fit, with the case in point being gamerlay.

I do not state that they are or should be interested.

My alternative solution doesn't have to involve contributor interaction.

> Someone interested in maintaining higher standards will need to
> maintain such higher standards on their own, experience shows that
> zero percent of that effort is absorbed by those contributors who are
> content with lower standards - they more or less explicitly state
> that they do not want to learn how to attain higher quality.

That's what I was suggesting: Use their work honoring them; but, do not
give them back reviews or feedback as they don't want that.

> Unless one has actually been in this position I think it may be
> difficult to understand how extremely demotivating it is to keep
> cleaning up after people who do not want to learn. It is neither
> sustainable for a single person nor for a team.

I feel the opposite, it is often easier to start from ebuilds that
already work than to start from those that don't; as at that point you
only need to apply testing and QA practices.

Whereas otherwise you would need to reinvent the wheel, what others
have already done before you.

This is at least how others and I handle ebuilds and patches that are
provided; but yes, I also see people that rather start from scratch.
It's kind of a personal opinion thing, and I believe both approaches
are a good way; the existence of one shouldn't exclude the other...

> If there's infrastructure to support it I'm strongly in favor of
> letting everyone do what they like to do, a sort of live and let
> live.

There's always going to be so; eg. GitHub, but even with the existence
of such infrastructure we actually won't need it, because the gamerlay
project is backed by Gentoo Developers so I doubt there will be
deprecation of it any time soon. Indeed, let it live.

> The question is why high quality would matter.

It does for the Portage tree or official overlays that intend to deal
with quite a large audience, it doesn't have to be so for gamerlay.

-- 
With kind regards,

Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer

E-mail address  : TomWij@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key  : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2  ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: official games repository

[Duncan]

Peter Stuge posted on Tue, 22 Oct 2013 05:19:01 +0200 as excerpted:

> Rich Freeman wrote:

>> [Peter Stuge posted...]
>>>
>>> Everything in the Gentoo project is per definition strictly
>>> developer-only. I suppose that it's a function of having the project
>>> centered around a foundation.
>> 
>> I can't think of any reason that the Foundation would have anything to
>> do with who can and cannot participate in anything related to Gentoo.

Good catch.  I was confused by that wording as well, but thought of 
"foundation" in the sense of (physical) underlying superstructure as 
opposed to (social/legal) organization, because "Gentoo Foundation" in 
the social/legal sense, for those knowing about it at all, indeed doesn't 
make sense here.  But it's good to put an end to that speculation 
directly, since otherwise it's likely spread further confusion in the 
future.

> The reason I had in mind is indeed the all-or-nothing security model for
> the publications (ebuilds is what I had in mind, I should have written
> "Everything I know in the Gentoo project...", sorry about that!) where
> even Copyright seems to have to be assigned to the foundation.

That has actually been debated here from time to time, and the general 
agreement seems to be that assigning copyright to the Gentoo Foundation 
is recommended (for various reasons), but specifically *NOT* required, in 
part because some gentoo devs (Greg KH was one who specifically stated 
he'd probably have to resign from being a gentoo dev in that case, I'd 
guess due to the work-for-hire clauses in his employment contract which 
allow him to contribute to FLOSS projects but NOT to surrender copyright, 
which as a work-for-hire, remains with his employer) would very likely be 
unable to participate were that the case.

While there's also ethical arguments to be made on either side, the 
practical effect of triggering the resignation of multiple gentoo devs 
were copyright assignment forced, basically put an end to the discussion.

>> Gentoo projects have involved non-developers from time to time.  The
>> documentation project even gives commit access to non-developers,
> 
> Awesome! I'm really glad that I was wrong about that - but at the same
> time documentation tends to serve a bootstrapping function,
> and thus matter less over time.

[The actual reason I bothered replying as it's core to the debate at 
hand.]

It's worth noting that one of the big reasons projects use overlays is to 
allow non-devs more, in some cases basically full, access.  As covered 
below that's simply not practical in the main tree, but under the 
relatively narrower confines and tighter direct supervision of a project 
overlay, active project users very often work hand in hand with full 
gentoo devs as effective co-equals in the project overlay.  Of course 
users do have to have a bit of history with the project before they gain 
that level of trust, but once they get it, they may well get full access 
to the overlay, with the only differences between what they can do and 
what a full dev can do being that a dev can transfer to the main tree, 
and of course also that if there ever /were/ a disagreement that got to
the point of "me or him", the dev would most likely win, but of course 
everyone knows that so in practice it doesn't tend to get to that point.

However, project overlays are entirely under the control of that project, 
which means it's up to them what the rules are.  Projects such as kde 
(the one I'm most familiar with in that regard, but there are others) 
really depend quite heavily on the work of trusted users who really do a 
lot of the actual grunt work in the overlay, while others are I believe 
gentoo-dev-only.

So it ends up being a project decision.  If the devs in the games project 
aren't comfortable with user write access, their overlay, their rules, 
and it won't happen.  If they are, their overlay, their rules, and it 
will.

Which is what this whole thread is about.  Apparently the games project 
devs aren't comfortable with user access, at least not enough to make the 
existing user-controlled overlay a viable official project overlay, so if 
they want an overlay, they will need to create a new one.  Perhaps at 
some point they'll /get/ comfortable with having trusted user access and 
gamerlay might tighten up access a bit so they can merge, but at this 
point, a new, seperate devs-only overlay seems to be what they have in 
mind, and as they'll be making the decisions, that's very likely what 
they'll get.

>> The way our current portage tree is set up basically forces us into an
>> all-or-nothing security model for commit access - we don't have layers
>> of integration testing to protect users from errors or abuses.
>> 
>> Proxy maintainership is one way around this.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

Re: [gentoo-dev] OT: user-developer/privileges in IRC

[yac]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1345 bytes --]

On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 13:02:29 +0400
Sergey Popov <pinkbyte@gentoo.org> wrote:

> 22.10.2013 07:19, Peter Stuge пишет:
> > I should have included bugzilla among mailing lists+IRC, users can
> > indeed also have elevated privileges on IRC, but never equal to
> > developers. It is radical exclusion and I'm reminded of it every
> > time the #gentoo-dev channel mode catches my eye, painfully so if
> > there's a discussion I could perhaps contribute to. Most of the time
> > it is easy enough to say something privately to a relevant
> > developer, but that's still very different from actual
> > participation.
> > 
> 
> Yes, and i think that it was done for a reason. 

Now I wonder if the +m on IRC was set proactively or reactively. If the
former it could be worth a try to -m.

> But nobody stops you
> from requesting temporarily voice on #gentoo-dev and when you
> contributions will be marked as significant - gentoo/contributor
> cloak, that will give you permanent voice in #gentoo-dev.
> 
> You should understand that #gentoo-dev is channel for developer's
> communication primarily and it is not so restricted, as you think.
> 
> For example, #gentoo-infra is totally restricted to developers only,
> other interested parties should be added to channel ACLs explicitly or
> should get invite there.


[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] OT: user-developer/privileges in IRC

[Dirkjan Ochtman]

On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 4:55 PM, yac <yac@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Now I wonder if the +m on IRC was set proactively or reactively. If the
> former it could be worth a try to -m.

Yeah, I kind of feel it should be -m, as well. If need be, we can be
more proactive about kickbanning people (ops enough, after all).

Cheers,

Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] OT: user-developer/privileges in IRC

[Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn]

Dirkjan Ochtman schrieb:
> On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 4:55 PM, yac <yac@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Now I wonder if the +m on IRC was set proactively or reactively. If the
>> former it could be worth a try to -m.
> Yeah, I kind of feel it should be -m, as well. If need be, we can be
> more proactive about kickbanning people (ops enough, after all).

We had -m for a short period this year already. AFAIR users then came
into the channel and asked support or ebuild development questions, so
it was reverted to +m.


Best regards,
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Markos Chandras]

On 10/22/2013 09:54 AM, Sergey Popov wrote:
> 20.10.2013 20:12, hasufell пишет:
>> This thread is derailed and I have no further interest in discussing here.
>>
> 
> And again, no offense, but it is not the first time when you are jumped,
> said, "Everything in X is wrong!" and then said "I have lost interest".
> It is very "mature" position to propose enhancement and then - hides, do
> not you think?
> 
> Sorry if i am saying harsh words, just talking how it looks like from
> side view.
> 

No need to escallate this further. People can form their own opinions on
the subject.

-- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras

Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository

[Markos Chandras]

On 10/22/2013 09:48 AM, Sergey Popov wrote:
> 20.10.2013 18:31, hasufell пишет:
>> Gamerlay is not related to the games team
> 
> I am sorry, but it is games team not related to gamerlay. No offense,
> but gamerlay guys sometims just do their job.
> 
> So, MAKE it related to Games team and fix stuff, considered broken.
> 
>> gamerlay which is a project that has failed.
> 
> Please, do not throw such sentences without objective clarification, thanks.
> 
>> I have zero interest to work on gamerlay.
> 
> So, this is your personal attitude to be against of gamerlay. We have
> got this, thanks.
> 

Again, lets stop here please. I think we proved that the Gentoo dev
community as a whole is not hostile to user community overlays/projects.

-- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras