On 27-07-2025, I filed the bug 960733 <https://bugs.gentoo.org/960773#>. It
was about the fact
that on 25-07-2025 portage silently overwritten my custom
keyboard layout files situated in CONFIG_PROTECT-ed
directory /usr/share/X11/xkb/symbols.

Later the same day, when this bug was closed with NOFIX status,
I also commented that

For me, it is a failure of Gentoo to meet its own specifications
and common sense in general because a rolling release distribution
definitely should preserve user-changed configuration files.

Today, on 28-07-2025, Sam James <[email protected]> wrote there the following:

I hadn't seen the new comments in the other bug (bug 957712
<https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=957712>). Locking
accordingly.
I won't repeat everything others have said, but I will note that
listing the applications in question that weren't using these
locations would've been quite helpful in constructively moving
forward.
Restrict Comments: 1

I wanted to reply to this with the following message, which I have
also posted to gentoo-user mailing list:
"In my last attempt I have copied the whole /usr/share/X11/xkb/
directory into /etc/xkb and have changed there one symbol in one
of my custom keyboard layout files to a different one so that I can
tell which of the keyboard layout files are used. I also copied my
custom keyboard layout files directly into /etc/xkb/

The result: xfce terminal  and firefox use files in /usr/share/X11/xkb/
and do not use those in /etc/xkb

It does not exclude the possibility that it will use files from /etc/xkb
if those from /usr/share/X11/xkb/ but I have not checked that."

but found out that I am "not allowed to make an additional comment on this bug."

I suspect that silencing my on this bug report has been done by the same
Sam James, as he always appears in discussions of bugs reported by me
with a very "helpful" remarks that my "remark aren't really helpful"
or something
like that.

See, for example, the discussion under the bug 947363
<https://bugs.gentoo.org/947363#c3> that has never
been even considered and is now already outdated.

I wonder who is Sam James and whether this silencing policy represents
the official policy of Gentoo.

I am using Gentoo already for 12 years from about 30 years of using
Linux in general (starting approximately from 1996), however I never
been so insulted and disappointed with a Linux distribution policy as
I am now (except for the reply of Ubuntu CEO in 2012 that she better
knows what will be convenient for the users than the users themselves;
that is when I have changed to Gentoo).

Recently I came across the following comment
<https://www.linux.org.ru/forum/general/16891018> by a Russian Gentoo user
on Gentoo policy:

"Who would have doubted that Gentoo would end up in such a mess with its
current development and governance policies:


   1.

   First, Gentoo ignores the community.
   2.

   Then the community slowly begins to drift away.
   3.

   Response of Gentoo: ‘Don’t like it? Go use another distro.’
   4.

   The community starts to leave in droves.
   5.

   Maintainers begin to walk away too.
   6.

   New users: ‘This is broken, that is broken.’ Gentoo responds: ‘We don’t
   have enough maintainers or funding. And we’re volunteers anyway!’
   7.

   The distro accumulates bugs because there’s no community left to address
   them.
   8.

   Gentoo reaction: ‘Pretend nothing’s wrong and carry on as usual.’ ← This
   is where Gentoo is now.
   9.

   Death of the distribution."

It is a translation from Russian. The original comment can be found here:
https://www.linux.org.ru/forum/general/16891018

I am not sure that step 9 will ever happen but I have a very strong feeling
that Gentoo is currently on step 8.

Reply via email to