From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.62) (envelope-from ) id 1HwTgn-0007qC-F8 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 08 Jun 2007 01:54:57 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with SMTP id l581s1I2029986; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 01:54:01 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.0/8.14.0) with ESMTP id l581qCIE027655 for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 01:52:12 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6361D64E15 for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 01:52:12 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: 0.373 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.373 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.957, RCVD_NUMERIC_HELO=1.253, TW_SK=0.077] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id RFOvZzP8JITF for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 01:52:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E9DCA64801 for ; Fri, 8 Jun 2007 01:52:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1HwTdw-00005x-U7 for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Fri, 08 Jun 2007 03:52:00 +0200 Received: from 82.152.204.56 ([82.152.204.56]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 08 Jun 2007 03:52:00 +0200 Received: from slong by 82.152.204.56 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 08 Jun 2007 03:52:00 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Steve Long Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Non-Dev Contributors and the Tree Date: Fri, 08 Jun 2007 02:50:02 +0100 Message-ID: References: <4667EF71.9010103@gentoo.org> <200706071650.54612.philantrop@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.152.204.56 User-Agent: KNode/0.10.4 Sender: news X-Archives-Salt: 4b9b5652-8502-48f3-919e-915eafd19c1d X-Archives-Hash: 7574baac1689c09baf4c74cd99e15a23 Duncan wrote: > The difference, as I read the proposal, is that while Sunrise is about > packages that are /not/ in the main tree yet (if it's moved to the tree, > it's out of sunrise, tho it might move to another overlay if > appropriate), this proposal would extend that to packages that are in the > tree as well. > Thanks for the clarification. > (Vetted) users could commit to in-tree packages, but only in the (main) > development overlay. It'd be Sunrise, but just as devs watch what's > going on there with the eventual goal of getting some of the ebuilds into > the tree, so here, devs would watch and make commits to the (mirrored) > tree from the development overlay. > Makes sense, although it does sound like sunrise could be extended for this purpose. Of course i have nfc about how sunrise works behind-teh-scenes.. > I've not read the rest of the responses yet, but the question I had > was... OK, but won't that result in either (a) developers getting /more/ > bump/test/grind, not less, since more of it would be taking commits > already made by users and applying them to the mirrored tree (the > committing users get more of the creativity, the devs end up being just > shuttle monkeys, vetting then shuttling from the dev tree to the mirrored > tree), > Hmm good point. I was thinking it might fit more with the suggestion for users[1] to be involved with patches etc. This all sounds like the wine triage thing[2] tho, which would need perhaps a more streamlined usage of bugzilla so that discussions don't take place there, but on the m-l (see the recently linked FOSS book about this exact issue.) Of course discussions with no useful purpose need to be proactively filtered.. > or (b) the mirrored tree eventually falling seriously behind? IMO > there may need to be mechanisms to prevent it from going one way or the > other, as I don't otherwise see the proposed situation of dev then > mirrored tree as being stable over time -- it'll lean toward a or b above. > Well it's always a balancing act, but neither of those poles sounds attractive. Personally i think use of Deskzilla and development of a Free equivalent would really help, along with useful posts like yours of course ;) Regards, igli #friendly-coders @ irc.freenode.org We're still here for you. ;D [1] Solely in the interests of avoiding self-mutilation by the more fragile members of this community ;p [2] http://kegel.com/wine/qa/#triage -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list