From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M4wT4-0008E1-Pj for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 15 May 2009 12:24:50 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1A8B8E0383; Fri, 15 May 2009 12:24:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBE90E0383 for ; Fri, 15 May 2009 12:24:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81FC565C68 for ; Fri, 15 May 2009 12:24:48 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.89 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.89 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.709, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] 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 NF2p9OsA9cvn for ; Fri, 15 May 2009 12:24:41 +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 340E7649A0 for ; Fri, 15 May 2009 12:24:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1M4wSn-0003fK-OE for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Fri, 15 May 2009 12:24:33 +0000 Received: from ip68-231-21-207.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.21.207]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 15 May 2009 12:24:33 +0000 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-21-207.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 15 May 2009 12:24:33 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: RFC: Project proposal -- maintainer-wanted Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 12:24:23 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1242261133.23088.82.camel@localhost> <4A0B738F.3030000@allenjb.me.uk> <4A0C2E6B.1040107@gentoo.org> <200905150943.57830.bangert@gentoo.org> <4A0D3E3B.5010108@gentoo.org> <6142e6140905150344y4a8007b5wd352ffe891e49230@mail.gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-21-207.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies) Sender: news Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 8b9460b5-5662-4850-8126-20b30acc9de1 X-Archives-Hash: 735d3f28946062ccdaacb2d6131a2e3d Daniel Pielmeier posted 6142e6140905150344y4a8007b5wd352ffe891e49230@mail.gmail.com, excerpted below, on Fri, 15 May 2009 12:44:47 +0200: > 2009/5/15 Marijn Schouten (hkBst) : >> >> Thilo Bangert wrote: >>> >>> Fedora is a much more current distribution than Gentoo - and has been >>> for a couple of years... >> >> Please elaborate what exactly you think Fedora does better than we do. >> I have no first-hand experience with Fedora, but from what I read I ha= d >> the impression that sometimes they go with new stuff before it is >> ready, like KDE4 and pulseaudio. I like about the current situation >> that we also have all those things available AFAICS, but have very >> broad choices in how much we want to bleed. IMO this is a different >> issue than having supposedly popular ebuilds not in main tree. >> > AFAIK Fedora is [Red Hat's unstable.] So it makes more sense to > compare it with the Gentoo unstable tree instead of the stable > one. Assuming this there is probably not a big difference in the > up-to-dateness. Well, yes and no. As the GP said, they sometimes go with new stuff=20 before it's ready -- before Gentoo even has it in-tree hard-masked let=20 alone ~arch, while it's still in the various project overlays. I know=20 they've had some serious issues with xorg on Intel GPUs at least, due to=20 running versions that aren't in our tree yet, only in the X overlay,=20 because Fedora is running clearly not even ~arch-ready packages,=20 sometimes even xorg prereleases. Years ago we'd have put these in-tree but hard-masked for those who=20 wanted to try them. Now, depending on the package and Gentoo but more=20 likely as the complexity rises to meta-package levels, those who want to=20 try them must load an overlay. As someone who selectively unmasks and=20 tries these, having them in-tree but hard-masked is convenient, but I=20 understand why projects may prefer overlays in many cases. However, none of this directly applies to the subject at hand, because=20 while we're talking new versions of packages already in-tree here, the=20 subject at hand is packages that aren't in-tree in any form yet. --=20 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