From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3A3ED138C48 for ; Sun, 12 Apr 2015 10:13:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 42B47E0BEE; Sun, 12 Apr 2015 10:13:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8499E0BED for ; Sun, 12 Apr 2015 10:13:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost.localnet (unknown [101.80.233.212]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: patrick) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7F5EE340A46 for ; Sun, 12 Apr 2015 10:13:27 +0000 (UTC) From: Patrick Lauer To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Status update of Sunrise project? Date: Sun, 12 Apr 2015 18:13:22 +0800 Message-ID: <1806927.R9hZiOYz1D@localhost> User-Agent: KMail/4.14.6 (Linux/3.19.0-gentoo; KDE/4.14.6; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <552A4318.9080407@gentoo.org> References: <2170018.5uJKSu79xY@localhost> <552A4318.9080407@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Archives-Salt: 20f1bb77-62e3-4b8d-ad2e-5194fee2004b X-Archives-Hash: 0b9315c1d6e3c28d50812dd8e9f3026a On Sunday 12 April 2015 12:04:08 hasufell wrote: > On 04/12/2015 12:02 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote: > > On Sunday 12 April 2015 11:59:09 hasufell wrote: > >> On 04/11/2015 01:54 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > >>> 1. What does proxy-maintainers lack in comparison to sunrise > >>> exclusively. The immediate question is whether sunrise should be > >>> migrated to proxy-maintainers, so this specific comparison is > >>> important. > >> > >> proxy-maintainers lack: > >> 1. a repository with a usable VCS > >> 2. an actual review workflow... @proxy-maintainers are just some sort of > >> backup committers. it's not a hub for contributors to gather, discuss, > >> get reviews and improve skills > >> 3. means to ensure the tree doesn't break > >> 4. actively look for and educate potential developers, even before the > >> recruitment process > > > > Oh my. > > > > Can you please stop being such a drama queen and accept reality every now > > and then? > > I am unable to see how that contributes anything to the discussion. > Could you please stay on the factual level? So. (1) is a completely subjective opinion (2) is kinda ... like ... your opinion, if you were actually involved with proxy-maint you'd know better (3) uhm what? That is just absurd speculation without a factual base in our common shared reality (4) That's, like, your opinion, maaan. If you actually spent time near proxy-maint, or in #gentoo-dev-help, or basically anywhere where you'd interact with people, you'd not have these absurd fantasies about stuff. So I suggest you can try to do some proper fact finding first :) ... and then we could even try having a constructive discussion. That'd be, like, AAAWESOOME. > > >> So it should, if at all, be the other way around: dissolve > >> proxy-maintainers, fix the sunrise workflow and make it the contribution > >> hub again it once was. But I'm not actually advocating for that. I think > >> the sunrise concept doesn't work anymore. > > > > proxy-maint is the least broken process we have. Unless you have > > constructive criticism I don't see why you waste time whining about > > everything. > You have obviously not read the whole email. I did offer an alternative > solution. Please read the whole text. Mhhh yes. No. Thanks for playing. (Are you trying to get me drunk? Because that's how you get me drunk ...)