On Thu, 08 Jun 2006 18:09:04 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > On Thu, 2006-06-08 at 16:23 -0400, Peter wrote: >> I did not read anything that implied o.g.o would bypass anything other >> than a lengthy wait in bugzilla land. Other distros have their >> experimental/testing branches, why can't gentoo? > > *cough* ~arch *cough* > > What everybody seems to miss is that having the ebuild in the overlay > doesn't "bypass" any sort of wait. It still is not in the tree. It is > still "unsupported". Having a couple developers do a 30 second check > over an ebuild does not instantly make it good quality.
You're right. However it allows certain ebuilds to get published long before they would (if ever) waiting in bugzilla maintainer-wanted. Unless I am totally naive or utopian or foolish (or all of the above), what is wrong for having an overlay for orphaned or ebuilds that will never be supported. Things not being in the tree is the whole purpose of the overlay as I understand it. Some things should not be in the tree, some things should. However, for many different reasons, some things that should be in the tree just don't get there. Quality is subjective. I could write a perfect ebuild for foo.bar, but the program could suck. Or, someone could write a piss poor ebuild for "best program ever" and q/a would slam it rightfully so. Such an ebuild would likely not get onto overlay either. But for those motivated enough to want to push an ebuild, the o.g.o provides such an outlet. And, for me again as a user, using a gentoo-hosted overlay is preferable to a third party repository. This is a personal bias on my part -- and maybe unwarranted. Warn users that ebuild in o.g.o come with no assurances whatsoever, and let the market decide if this is a source worthy of use! -- Peter -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
