From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-64225-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9783E138247
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:38:56 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 21E80E0D35;
Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:38:50 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
(using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0DB95E0CB9
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:38:48 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F2B9833F69C
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:38:47 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.209
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.209 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5
tests=[AWL=-1.206, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001,
SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1])
by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:::ffff:127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
with ESMTP id q8YEuPgFnFDQ for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>;
Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:38:42 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3])
(using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id D0A5233F6C7
for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:38:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69)
(envelope-from <lnx-gentoo-dev@m.gmane.org>)
id 1W1hue-0003ss-Dk
for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 20:38:36 +0100
Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224])
by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 20:38:36 +0100
Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian))
id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00
for <gentoo-dev@gentoo.org>; Fri, 10 Jan 2014 20:38:36 +0100
X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Portage QOS
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:38:14 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <pan$ccf$199f9999$12e9cf1f$fb76caba@cox.net>
References: <52ce4eab.463f700a.4b43.16bd@mx.google.com>
<CAAr7Pr9a_BRZji8LTJb7rE53ASgyA4nP2ysVGkr+5m5JRjnYDw@mail.gmail.com>
<52ce9994.24f5980a.0660.342e@mx.google.com>
<pan$d20bf$750bc60b$823d720e$55b4506@cox.net>
<52cf09c2.463f700a.4b43.58d7@mx.google.com> <52CF0FD7.8010608@gentoo.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org
X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net
User-Agent: Pan/0.140 (Chocolate Salty Balls; GIT 6daf184
/usr/src/portage/src/egit-src/pan2)
X-Archives-Salt: 263b0cf1-57da-4f50-89f5-9f49dc6bc811
X-Archives-Hash: db2eebc86cb4882fd3cc0829c304c162
Chris Reffett posted on Thu, 09 Jan 2014 16:08:39 -0500 as excerpted:
>> To keep in power it's in your deepest interest to close the open gates
>> that invite competition while the power is in your hands.
>> PortageQOS is small step, it's not everything or main part of the
>> system, it's a just small contribution. But it will close the door and
>> you'll have another peaceful 8 years to rule.
>>
> Right here is the big problem: you're not looking at this from the
> perspective of the average Gentoo developer. We don't care about market
> share. We don't care whether we're on top for another few years. There
> are several forks of Gentoo. I doubt most devs care about them.
Agreed with Chris.
@ Igor:
Closed... open. You clearly don't seem to get it.
There's a reason it's called "open source", contrasting favorably with
"closed source". You're seriously pushing deliberately closing the door
on people's choice? That's typical closed-source methology, and what
many FLOSS folks would consider the antithesis of the entire reason they
do what they do. And that's your sales point, to a community-based open-
source-based distro, not to some closed source company like MS?
If Gentoo dies, well, rest in peace, Gentoo, it was good while it lasted,
but people moved on to something that suited their needs better.
That's the whole point. If people are more comfortable with a binary
distro, there's lots of them available, and many gentoo users and devs
are even happy to take some time to listen to what a user needs and make
the best recommendation they can about a distro that fits that need. If
people want a distro that's near as expert level and with near the choice
of gentoo, but don't want to /always/ have to build /everything/ from
source, Arch Linux is over that way, or if you want to stick with the
general gentoo idea but want a few tweaks, Funtoo's over that way, and
Sabayon is over there. And if they want to go full-out and build
/everything/ from source without gentoo's automated framework, well,
Linux from Scratch is right over yonder too!
The thing is, we don't see this as a game where if those distros win, we
lose, or if we win, they lose. Instead, we're different players on the
same team, and if we can helpfully direct users their way that are more
comfortable with them than with us, great, and we'll hope they'll do the
same with people who might be more comfortable here, too, but we're not
making that a condition of our directing people we know will be more
comfortable there to them.
Similarly, we're on the same team when it comes to patches. No distro or
their developers/maintainers want the *FULL* burden of supporting all
those packages, and if Gentoo devs can find a Fedora or Debian patch that
solves a problem we too have, or if we came up with a patch first that
solves a problem they're having too, great, have at it!
And in all that, if Gentoo's former devs and users all end up on Arch or
LFS instead, as I said, rest in peace, Gentoo, it was good having known
you, but your time appears to have been up, and others took your place.
But you're talking deliberately closing doors and walling in users so
they don't switch, instead of happily pointing them at distros they'd
obviously be more comfortable with. WTF is that sort of attitude doing
here in free/libre and open source in the first place? That's more the
walled garden Apple or MS approach, not FLOSS.
Meanwhile, you might try googling Zynot. That was one early, perhaps the
first, Gentoo fork. Such talk of cutthroat competition in a zero-sum
game, of deliberately cutting off user options so they'd be forced to
stick with you, of it can be us or them, not both, etc, was exactly the
sort of thing they tried. That was 2002/2003 or so. While the events
and acrimony surrounding that did ultimately drive Gentoo's founder
(Daniel Robbins) elsewhere, Gentoo survived (thanks in part to drobbins'
efforts to secure a good future for it even at heavy personal cost to
himself and his family as he was already in the process of leaving).
Gentoo's still here, but where is zynot today?
I remember back in early 2004 as I was researching my switch to gentoo,
reading up on zynot, which was at that time still a going concern, and
repeatedly asking myself as I read the essays from zynot's founder
heavily criticizing gentoo and its founder, why can't he see what's
happening, that every single thing he's negatively pointing at in gentoo
and drobbins he and zynot are doing themselves in far greater measure,
and why he was so stuck on closed source competitive techniques in an
open source world. His very essays, supposedly criticizing gentoo,
instead ended up convincing me more than ever that gentoo was /exactly/
the right choice for me. =:^)
And... gentoo's still here, but where is zynot, today? I think I made
the right choice then, and I'm still convinced it was then and remains
now, the right choice, for me, today. =:^)
But if gentoo dies as a result of following those policies, well, it
dies, and I, and other gentoo users and devs, will find something else to
replace it. But gentoo didn't die when zynot was saying those things
(ultimately, zynot did), and pardon me for saying so, but I don't see it
dieing now, when you're saying them. Instead, the risk of death is if we
belief and follow them now, just as it was then.
--
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