On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 11:06 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote: > The thing has been sitting in bugzilla for ages, I've asked Flameeyes to > commit it and he said he's not going to put any mode pam stuff into the > tree unless he's using the modules himself. Nothing wrong w/ that. So, I > can either keep on maintaining it in my local overlay or let other > people use it if they find it useful. I prefer the latter. pam_abl and > pam_mount is also stuff that I'm testing/using myself. The only thing I > haven't tested beyond "it compiles and installs" is pam_pgsql, that one > doesn't touch system-auth at all, comes w/ commented-out .conf and so > has no effect until the user has configured it.
Uhh... You're a developer. How about instead, you simply join the pam team with Flameeyes and add these packages and maintain them yourself? Do you really need an overlay with *countless* possibilities for other ebuilds to maintain 4 packages? > There are about 3 other bugs requesting pam stuff, but since that stuff > is essentially dead upstream, it won't be in the overlay. So, are you > asking to have a separate overlay project for 4 pam ebuilds? Heh, really > an overkill. No. It is called a repository that actually has an explicit purpose. I guess you've missed all of the other overlays out there that are limited to a specific scope. The funny thing is that I *know* that you use at least one of these external repositories, and I haven't heard you complaining that you need to move these packages to some free-for-all overlay such as this. I wonder why that is? > > Could be part of the policy to not touch existing ebuilds. > > IMHO the sunrice project is a good place for maintainer-wanted/needed > bugs. Shouldn't be a dumpspace for whatever experimental patches for > stuff that's actually being maintained in the main tree. It really is funny when you're arguing *for* something, yet you call it the "sunrice" project. Freudian slip, or an admission of truth? > >> This is a prime example of totally glossing over any discussion to make > >> it sound promising for you. > > If bugzilla wasn't so sucky people wouldn't try to use other methods of > > communication ;-) > > Erm, look at the vmware-server bug > (http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=122500) . It's vastly useless > for grabbing any ebuilds, there are ~350 comments and tons of obsolete, > yet not marked as such ebuilds, that's why you switched to subversion, > right? And it boosted the effectivity by a huge margin. Also comes w/ a > nice side-effect of not bugspamming another 200 folks CCed on the bug > when someone screws w/ attachments for a couple of times. So you're going to try to use my own project as an example against me? Great. Bring it on. The vmware overlay is limited to only vmware products. When someone uses the overlay, they *know* that they are only getting ebuilds related to vmware. The project sunricer overlay is for any ebuilds of any kind. It is not focused on anything, what-so-ever, and has had many arguments against its use for many reasons. In the future, if you're going to try to use someone's project as an argument against them, at least try to come up with an argument that works. Using a focused overlay as an example of why a massive, bloated, free-for-all overlay should exist isn't exactly helping your argument, but instead helps mine. Thanks for making my work easier. =] -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering - Strategic Lead x86 Architecture Team Games - Developer Gentoo Linux
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
