[gentoo-dev] Sunrise Project -- Open questions post requirement

[gentoo-dev] Sunrise Project -- Open questions post requirement

[Markus Ullmann]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 416 bytes --]

Hi,

so as I was told that I avoid the questions regarding this project
several times now, please repost all open issues you have with this
project clearly, each in one or max two short sentences here.
I'll answer them all the same way to keep out all non-belonging stuff.

Maybe that way we avoid any misunderstandings, nearly doubled posts and
repeating ourselves over and over again.

Greetz,
Jokey


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Sunrise Project -- Sunrise FAQ

[Stefan Schweizer]

Markus Ullmann wrote:
> Maybe that way we avoid any misunderstandings, nearly doubled posts and
> repeating ourselves over and over again.

The problem is that some questions and answers easily get lost in a mailing
list. To solve this shortcoming, I am starting to make a FAQ page in the
trac wiki:
http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq

We are adding new questions there, if you have some additions, please talk
to me and I will add them for you.

Thanks,
Stefan

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Sunrise Project -- Sunrise FAQ

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 746 bytes --]

On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 19:10 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> Markus Ullmann wrote:
> > Maybe that way we avoid any misunderstandings, nearly doubled posts and
> > repeating ourselves over and over again.
> 
> The problem is that some questions and answers easily get lost in a mailing
> list. To solve this shortcoming, I am starting to make a FAQ page in the
> trac wiki:
> http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq
> 
> We are adding new questions there, if you have some additions, please talk
> to me and I will add them for you.

I have one...

What will it take for this project to go away?

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Sunrise Project -- Sunrise FAQ

[James Potts]

On 6/9/06, Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 19:10 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> > Markus Ullmann wrote:
> > > Maybe that way we avoid any misunderstandings, nearly doubled posts and
> > > repeating ourselves over and over again.
> >
> > The problem is that some questions and answers easily get lost in a mailing
> > list. To solve this shortcoming, I am starting to make a FAQ page in the
> > trac wiki:
> > http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq
> >
> > We are adding new questions there, if you have some additions, please talk
> > to me and I will add them for you.
>
> I have one...
>
> What will it take for this project to go away?
>
I have a counter-question to this:  What modifications to the sunrise
(not sunrice, btw) project would have to be made to get you to stop
actively trying to shut it down?  I really don't care if you think the
team will be willing to make the changes, list them anyway, please. :)

I'm asking because I think that this project is a Good Thing, if it
gets handled correctly.  I also agree that if it is not handled
correctly it can and will be a Very Bad Thing.

--Arek
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Sunrise Project -- Sunrise FAQ

[James Potts]

On 6/9/06, Stefan Schweizer <genstef@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Markus Ullmann wrote:
> > Maybe that way we avoid any misunderstandings, nearly doubled posts and
> > repeating ourselves over and over again.
>
> The problem is that some questions and answers easily get lost in a mailing
> list. To solve this shortcoming, I am starting to make a FAQ page in the
> trac wiki:
> http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq
>
> We are adding new questions there, if you have some additions, please talk
> to me and I will add them for you.
>
I do have a question:  If you're allowing just anybody who asks to
have commit access to the repo, what guarantees can you give me that
they won't commit something deliberately malicious or which will break
the entire overlay to the overlay?

--Arek
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Sunrise Project -- Sunrise FAQ

[Stefan Schweizer]

James Potts wrote:
> I do have a question:  If you're allowing just anybody who asks to
> have commit access to the repo, what guarantees can you give me that
> they won't commit something deliberately malicious or which will break
> the entire overlay to the overlay?

I have added this to the FAQ:
http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq#Howareyouensuringthatthereisnob0rken/maliciuscodegettingintotheoverlay

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Sunrise Project -- Sunrise FAQ

[Daniel Ostrow]

On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 14:46 -0500, James Potts wrote:
> On 6/9/06, Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 19:10 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> > > Markus Ullmann wrote:
> > > > Maybe that way we avoid any misunderstandings, nearly doubled posts and
> > > > repeating ourselves over and over again.
> > >
> > > The problem is that some questions and answers easily get lost in a mailing
> > > list. To solve this shortcoming, I am starting to make a FAQ page in the
> > > trac wiki:
> > > http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq
> > >
> > > We are adding new questions there, if you have some additions, please talk
> > > to me and I will add them for you.
> >
> > I have one...
> >
> > What will it take for this project to go away?
> >
> I have a counter-question to this:  What modifications to the sunrise
> (not sunrice, btw) project would have to be made to get you to stop
> actively trying to shut it down?  I really don't care if you think the
> team will be willing to make the changes, list them anyway, please. :)
> 
> I'm asking because I think that this project is a Good Thing, if it
> gets handled correctly.  I also agree that if it is not handled
> correctly it can and will be a Very Bad Thing.


To start with (and mind you this is just my list):

1). At least one member of the project must be familiar enough with each
of the officially supported architectures, x86, amd64, ppc, ppc64, hppa,
alpha, mips, sparc and ia64, to support any bugs which arise due to arch
specific issues. The level of knowledge must be on par with that which
is required to join any of the aforementioned arch teams. This is the
only way to ensure that arch teams do not experience a higher work load
because of this overlay's existence.

2). For a package to be added to the overlay at least one member of the
project must be familiar enough with the package that they would be
accepted into the team that would maintain the package if it were in the
mainline tree if they are not already a team member.  This is the only
way to ensure that non-arch teams do not experience a higher work load
because of this overlay's existence.

3). Teams must have the option to "opt-out" of participation. What this
would mean is if a team "opts-out" no packages may be placed in the
overlay that would be maintained by said team if the package was added
to the main tree. 

4). Packages cannot be added that are version bumps or bug fixes of
packages that are already in the tree.

5). The project must have an active security liaison who's job it would
be to ensure that there are no packages in the overlay that have
outstanding vulnerabilities.

6). The project must have an active QA liaison who's job it would be to
ensure that *all* of the QA standards that are applied to the main tree
are also applied to the projects overlay.

And the above is just the tip of the iceberg...but satisfy those and
I'll give you the rest.

The next thing I'll hear is "But this is really no different then
hosting them on Bugzilla except it lowers the bar for their use..."
Which brings me to my next point...like it or not the lower the bar for
their use the more generally accepted the idea that using the ebuilds in
this overlay is "officially supported".

--Dan

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Sunrise Project -- Sunrise FAQ

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2152 bytes --]

On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 14:46 -0500, James Potts wrote:
> On 6/9/06, Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 19:10 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> > > Markus Ullmann wrote:
> > > > Maybe that way we avoid any misunderstandings, nearly doubled posts and
> > > > repeating ourselves over and over again.
> > >
> > > The problem is that some questions and answers easily get lost in a mailing
> > > list. To solve this shortcoming, I am starting to make a FAQ page in the
> > > trac wiki:
> > > http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq
> > >
> > > We are adding new questions there, if you have some additions, please talk
> > > to me and I will add them for you.
> >
> > I have one...
> >
> > What will it take for this project to go away?
> >
> I have a counter-question to this:  What modifications to the sunrise
> (not sunrice, btw) project would have to be made to get you to stop
> actively trying to shut it down?  I really don't care if you think the
> team will be willing to make the changes, list them anyway, please. :)

It needs to not be a Gentoo project and not hosted on Gentoo
infrastructure, with absolutely no support from Gentoo.

I have absolutely no problem with overlays that are for a specific
target.  I would have no problems with either of the sunrise
"maintainers" starting their own overlays in projects they manage.  I
just can't imagine a dumping ground such as this being a good idea,
ever.  It would require an enormous amount of manpower.  How exactly can
2 people possibly cover the manpower needed for this when the *entire
developer pool* cannot handle it now in bugzilla?

> I'm asking because I think that this project is a Good Thing, if it
> gets handled correctly.  I also agree that if it is not handled
> correctly it can and will be a Very Bad Thing.

Unfortunately, I don't have much faith in this possibly being handled
correctly.  There simply isn't the manpower to do it properly *and*
officially.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Sunrise Project -- Sunrise FAQ

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3810 bytes --]

On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 16:18 -0400, Daniel Ostrow wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 14:46 -0500, James Potts wrote:
> > On 6/9/06, Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 19:10 +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> > > > Markus Ullmann wrote:
> > > > > Maybe that way we avoid any misunderstandings, nearly doubled posts and
> > > > > repeating ourselves over and over again.
> > > >
> > > > The problem is that some questions and answers easily get lost in a mailing
> > > > list. To solve this shortcoming, I am starting to make a FAQ page in the
> > > > trac wiki:
> > > > http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq
> > > >
> > > > We are adding new questions there, if you have some additions, please talk
> > > > to me and I will add them for you.
> > >
> > > I have one...
> > >
> > > What will it take for this project to go away?
> > >
> > I have a counter-question to this:  What modifications to the sunrise
> > (not sunrice, btw) project would have to be made to get you to stop
> > actively trying to shut it down?  I really don't care if you think the
> > team will be willing to make the changes, list them anyway, please. :)
> > 
> > I'm asking because I think that this project is a Good Thing, if it
> > gets handled correctly.  I also agree that if it is not handled
> > correctly it can and will be a Very Bad Thing.
> 
> 
> To start with (and mind you this is just my list):
> 
> 1). At least one member of the project must be familiar enough with each
> of the officially supported architectures, x86, amd64, ppc, ppc64, hppa,
> alpha, mips, sparc and ia64, to support any bugs which arise due to arch
> specific issues. The level of knowledge must be on par with that which
> is required to join any of the aforementioned arch teams. This is the
> only way to ensure that arch teams do not experience a higher work load
> because of this overlay's existence.
> 
> 2). For a package to be added to the overlay at least one member of the
> project must be familiar enough with the package that they would be
> accepted into the team that would maintain the package if it were in the
> mainline tree if they are not already a team member.  This is the only
> way to ensure that non-arch teams do not experience a higher work load
> because of this overlay's existence.
> 
> 3). Teams must have the option to "opt-out" of participation. What this
> would mean is if a team "opts-out" no packages may be placed in the
> overlay that would be maintained by said team if the package was added
> to the main tree. 
> 
> 4). Packages cannot be added that are version bumps or bug fixes of
> packages that are already in the tree.
> 
> 5). The project must have an active security liaison who's job it would
> be to ensure that there are no packages in the overlay that have
> outstanding vulnerabilities.
> 
> 6). The project must have an active QA liaison who's job it would be to
> ensure that *all* of the QA standards that are applied to the main tree
> are also applied to the projects overlay.
> 
> And the above is just the tip of the iceberg...but satisfy those and
> I'll give you the rest.
> 
> The next thing I'll hear is "But this is really no different then
> hosting them on Bugzilla except it lowers the bar for their use..."
> Which brings me to my next point...like it or not the lower the bar for
> their use the more generally accepted the idea that using the ebuilds in
> this overlay is "officially supported".

I would accept these steps being completed as a nice barrier for entry
for this project to start to be useful as a development tool.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Sunrise Project -- Sunrise FAQ

[Henrik Brix Andersen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 705 bytes --]

On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 02:46:39PM -0500, James Potts wrote:
> I have a counter-question to this:  What modifications to the sunrise
> (not sunrice, btw) project would have to be made to get you to stop
> actively trying to shut it down?  I really don't care if you think the
> team will be willing to make the changes, list them anyway, please. :)

It should be hosted on a non *.gentoo.org domain (nongentoo.org?) to
signal the fact that it contains unofficial and unsupported
ebuilds. I'll leave it up to infra to comment if this domain can be
hosted on official Gentoo hardware.

Regards,
Brix
-- 
Henrik Brix Andersen <brix@gentoo.org>
Gentoo Metadistribution | Mobile computing herd

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 213 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Sunrise Project -- Sunrise FAQ

[Wernfried Haas]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1755 bytes --]

On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 08:10:26PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> Markus Ullmann wrote:
> > Maybe that way we avoid any misunderstandings, nearly doubled posts and
> > repeating ourselves over and over again.
> 
> The problem is that some questions and answers easily get lost in a mailing
> list. To solve this shortcoming, I am starting to make a FAQ page in the
> trac wiki:
> http://overlays.gentoo.org/proj/sunrise/wiki/SunriseFaq

Read Message-ID: <20060608200549.GB10801@superlupo.rechner> before you
set up FAQ entries like: 

--snip--
Do I need to support Sunrise users and their questions now? 

You can treat this as you like on a case-by-case basis:

- Ebuild development questions should for example be discussed in
  #gentoo-dev-help and I have seen threads about it on
forums.gentoo.org and even helped there. There is no reason why
questions about ebuild writing for the Sunrise overlay should not be
treated equally. 
--snip--

Maybe i wasn't clear enough in my previous mail (which may be the
reason why it was simply ignored), but while we were taken by surprise
of a new project being announced and no one talking to us about where
this may fit in on the forums, this FAQ entry completely ignores what
i explicitely asked for in the mail above.
If you want to use the forums, that's fine and they are here to help
with problems, but deciding things without approaching us to find a
solution that also fits into our forums structure makes me have
reasonable doubts how this project will integrate into Gentoo.

cheers,
	Wernfried

-- 
Wernfried Haas (amne) - amne at gentoo dot org
Gentoo Forums: http://forums.gentoo.org
IRC: #gentoo-forums on freenode - email: forum-mods at gentoo dot org

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Sunrise Project -- Sunrise FAQ

[Stefan Schweizer]

Wernfried Haas wrote:
> - Ebuild development questions should for example be discussed in
>   #gentoo-dev-help and I have seen threads about it on
> forums.gentoo.org and even helped there. There is no reason why
> questions about ebuild writing for the Sunrise overlay should not be
> treated equally.
> --snip--
> 
> Maybe i wasn't clear enough in my previous mail (which may be the
> reason why it was simply ignored), but while we were taken by surprise
> of a new project being announced and no one talking to us about where
> this may fit in on the forums, this FAQ entry completely ignores what
> i explicitely asked for in the mail above.
> If you want to use the forums, that's fine and they are here to help
> with problems, but deciding things without approaching us to find a
> solution that also fits into our forums structure makes me have
> reasonable doubts how this project will integrate into Gentoo.

I actually was trying to adress your issues with that FAQ entry, sorry if
you feel like I have decided something. Please give me a reasonable
rewording if you think my assumption is not correct that this will be
treated equally by forums users (I count me in here, that is why I made the
assumption).
I will of course explicitly forbid any forums activity in the FAQ when you
have a problem with that.

- Stefan

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Sunrise Project -- Sunrise FAQ

[Anders Hellgren]

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

On Sat, 10 Jun 2006, Stefan Schweizer wrote:

> I actually was trying to adress your issues with that FAQ entry, sorry if
> you feel like I have decided something. Please give me a reasonable
> rewording if you think my assumption is not correct that this will be
> treated equally by forums users (I count me in here, that is why I made the
> assumption).
> I will of course explicitly forbid any forums activity in the FAQ when you
> have a problem with that.
>
> - Stefan
>
What the faq entry didn't say, and what amne asked for in his previous 
e-mail was that questions related to ebuilds not distributed as part of 
the official tree should be posted to the Unsupported Software forum [1]. 
We have neither reason nor desire to treat sunrise ebuilds differently 
from other user contributed ebuilds.

[1] http://forums.gentoo.org/viewforum-f-51.html

/Anders
- -- 
Anders Hellgren (kallamej)
Gentoo Forums Administrator
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFEigfVFX025WX+RG4RAoCdAKDGJvqNtORg28ZwC4FQrfHmGueLMwCfTLB8
OcB/l+0yVTG4sTWgAUyCecw=
=bSqm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: Sunrise Project -- Sunrise FAQ

[Stefan Schweizer]

Anders Hellgren wrote:
> What the faq entry didn't say, and what amne asked for in his previous
> e-mail was that questions related to ebuilds not distributed as part of
> the official tree should be posted to the Unsupported Software forum [1].
Yes


> We have neither reason nor desire to treat sunrise ebuilds differently
> from other user contributed ebuilds.
Yeah, I was just taking ebuild related questions in account. Of course
useage questions are only valid in an "Unsupported Software forum"

I added:

- For useage questions the "Unsupported Software forum" on forums.gentoo.org
is the right place

- Stefan

-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list