From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-160930-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 8CECD1389E2 for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 02:41:03 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7524DE0AA7; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 02:40:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from xavier.telenet-ops.be (xavier.telenet-ops.be [195.130.132.52]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 38EFEE0A70 for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 02:40:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([81.82.224.54]) by xavier.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id Y2gw1p0041B2MtM012gwsr; Fri, 26 Dec 2014 03:40:56 +0100 Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2014 03:40:40 +0100 From: Tom Wijsman <TomWij@gentoo.org> To: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> Cc: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo's future directtion ? Message-ID: <20141226034040.00002eb4@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <CAGfcS_=0rhQB4aMq5ajvS-R0rqGtVEY_ZX-UE4Ckp06+PcaR1w@mail.gmail.com> References: <op5uW-6vB-17@gated-at.bofh.it> <op5uW-6vB-19@gated-at.bofh.it> <op5uW-6vB-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <op5uW-6vB-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <op5uW-6vB-25@gated-at.bofh.it> <op5uW-6vB-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <opcd3-84i-7@gated-at.bofh.it> <5470D229.7000806@tampabay.rr.com> <5470DBF5.1060304@gentoo.org> <CAGfcS_=we+kk4i+tV6jwVi+K=6GNe3-N2N8baigDY5ndrbp_5w@mail.gmail.com> <547111B5.2030909@gentoo.org> <CAGfcS_=0rhQB4aMq5ajvS-R0rqGtVEY_ZX-UE4Ckp06+PcaR1w@mail.gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org> List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org> List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org> X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 5b8cd8b6-04d9-40c2-972b-593036ffbd77 X-Archives-Hash: 74e01c7b4a9a4538853211fcc9842162 On Sat, 22 Nov 2014 18:20:01 -0500 Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote: > What do you do if somebody blocks progress in your overlay structure? > You start another one. Sounds like something that can work, survival of the [insert anything]. > What do you do if somebody blocks progress in the current Gentoo > project structure? You either ask the Council for help, or start > another project. Survival of the Council once the amount of projects gets nears infinity. > You have just as many options under the status quo, and actually more. > > Now, what you would get is the ability to have more variety in quality > standards, since general QA/etc would not apply. Quantity and Quality rarely go together; consider how we're investing in Quality in a time we might benefit more from Quantity, also vice versa. > Well, then by your argument there is nothing wrong, since they're > already in the distributed model. There is nothing I can do about > people feeling alienated. We can bring attention to the overlays; eg. summarize them on the wiki. > If you want to contribute to Gentoo, then do it. If somebody blocks > your progress then ask for help. > > What I can't stand is people moping about their feelings being hurt > from umpteen years ago. I can't go back and fix the past. Get over > it - contribute or don't. Get born, make mistakes, learn from them, improve the future, die happy. > The games team has ZERO power over any dev doing anything to any > package in the tree. That was the outcome of the most recent Council > decision. We didn't disband the team because we thought that having a > team focused on games wasn't a bad idea, but so far nobody else seems > all that interested so it seems as likely as not that there won't be a > games team in the future. > > How is that not doing something radical? What more do you want us to > do? Preparations for the (un)expected future we're about to experience. > > It's not about elitist old-timers, it's about a more dynamic model > > that has low tolerance for > > * bugs being open since 8+ years, because no one bothers to > > review/change stuff (check nethack bug) > > * territorial behaviour > > * slacking devs slacking so hard, but not stepping down > > The reason the nethack bug is still open is because nobody cares > enough to fix it. ANYBODY can make themselves a maintainer of Nethack > right now and fix the bug. The reason that the Nethack bug is still > open is because you apparently care enough about it to post about it, > but not enough to fix it. I'm not going to fix it, because I don't > use Nethack. > > The issues you bring up were an issue in the past, and nobody really > has any tolerance for it these days. You keep bringing up past issues > that have been fixed, which really sounds to me like a demonstration > that we're running out of real current issues to fix. > > If there is somebody blocking progress on something, by all means > point it out. However, it needs to be a case where somebody is > actually trying to do something, not just complaints about all the > great stuff that could get done if somebody cared enough to even try. This emphasizes on a bad example from a collection of vague statements; while we ignore that, what does it have to do with the dynamic model? > [...] You're basically coming across as being impossible to satisfy, > because you bring up vague complaints without anything that anybody > can act upon, [...] Content on gentoo-user is more likely to be demand than it is supply.