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 8F999138A1A for ; Sat, 22 Nov 2014 22:20:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6F9DEE08FF; Sat, 22 Nov 2014 22:20:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ie0-f181.google.com (mail-ie0-f181.google.com [209.85.223.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3A437E07AE for ; Sat, 22 Nov 2014 22:20:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ie0-f181.google.com with SMTP id tp5so6953894ieb.12 for ; Sat, 22 Nov 2014 14:20:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type; bh=uNkstthZErnaUPd7f4Pep3aLmhKJbMdj10ZkQ255Iuk=; b=B0mhB+wl1TwgqFl2mjsddwXUkNHRMsp3YFWOY+VANlLRtgWTppxDUGtq7F+WEij9ni IE5sQgbC5R/gNWOBMxTiEFDeCfRuZmYSlJKFrB6sOLQdfC8hF+R040fc+RjWKIGG28YN BHKJLd1vBZxHhc/CC9yqHqkzDh8QnWnG3YkkK733NW6Axi3Dcqs8YthAvyB3Y3Pg2wc5 CM0dzwkUxkyaQ9Ni548sauB3CHMFziuPi9AqdnMTq0IA+xk8wiN5fXwLK1jm+Bp7g4mb ayPfgQVODKd2rSJdZjZrd5Lnngf5niqFaqxv/UVOHzqVV4DvLte2Io7La2LSrUP+isu8 M24A== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.43.202 with SMTP id y10mr4747716igl.41.1416694811213; Sat, 22 Nov 2014 14:20:11 -0800 (PST) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.107.9.80 with HTTP; Sat, 22 Nov 2014 14:20:11 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5470DBF5.1060304@gentoo.org> References: <5470D229.7000806@tampabay.rr.com> <5470DBF5.1060304@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 22 Nov 2014 17:20:11 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 0fZuDBW76mN9rO7PaWtmQX7bVVU Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo's future directtion ? From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: d6714bfe-7fa3-4c5d-b3d0-2871d8d42ec9 X-Archives-Hash: d0d7e0a14b291c17afc1f3507bd174f9 On Sat, Nov 22, 2014 at 1:54 PM, hasufell wrote: > > No one would care in such a distributed model if there is one person > blocking progress somewhere. They would just move on, regroup around a > new overlay and start working there and let that guy/project rot forever. > Nobody can block progress under the current model. If you feel otherwise, please point them out so that they can be dealt with. I'm fine with having more support for overlays/etc, but I don't think it is as easy as you're making it out to be. > > We don't need more authority, we need less... and we need more actual > opensource workflow. Our tools, our organizational model and our > workflow are ALL ancient. And they don't seem to work very well, do they? Gentoo is already fairly non-authoritative where the main tree is concerned. I'm all for more overlay support, but I doubt it is going to fix the kinds of issues you're bringing up. The problem with java is that nobody wants to work on it. Lots of people want to talk about working on it, but nobody is writing ebuilds. The problem with games is that nobody wants to work on those either. Lots of people like to talk about the games project blocking progress, but now that this has been eliminated, there isn't some flood of new games ebuilds. People love to talk about elitist old-timers blocking progress, but it seems to me that many of the old-timers don't do a whole lot of anything. I think the complaint is really that other people aren't doing the work we want them to do. -- Rich