On Wed, 14 Jun 2006 09:13:34 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: big snip..... > Except I'm not arguing about abandoned packages. I'm arguing about things > like kernel sources, that proponents of sunrise say should be in the > overlay, even after the kernel team says that it should *never* go into > the tree. In this case, the sunrise proponents are explicitly wanting to > go against the wishes of the project. This is not and can not be > acceptable, as it damages the *project* in question. Remember that people > will *always* associate the kernel project with any kernels we provide, > even if we put a big fat warning label on it. Warning labels don't > accomplish much with some users. >
Please let me clarify. My using the kernel-sources as an example in no way expresses any opinions by the Sunrise project, its leads, or members. I do not speak for the project, but am (as a user) interested in it and interested in participating in it. And, I should also clarify what dsd said about the beyond-sources. Basically, he was not issuing a judgement on whether or not the sources were good or bad. He _was_ indicating that the kernel team did not have the interest or manpower to maintain it, handle any bugs or problems with it. For that matter, he also expressed an opinion that he wished the ck-sources would go too! But, let me be clear, he was not saying the kernel team would never add it to portage because it was bad. Just that the kernel team did not want to because of manpower and support issues. I was _trying_ to use it as an example of an orphaned package that would benefit from Sunrise. Something which also was assigned to the kernel team (not to maintainer wanted), but has been languishing in bz since August of last year. I am sure there are others which have been assigned and not acted on too. This one, I had a personal interest in, which is why I brought it up. I suppose I would have been better off using http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=125727, which is on hold because there is a dependency issue with libexpat to be resolved by upstream, and may not make it to the tree. Either way, I was hoping to bring the user's perspective to this discussion. It seems on the -devel ml, there are far too few users comments. Just devs thinking they know what the users want and what is best for users. As a user, I think that attitude is seriously incorrect. For, as with every distro, once the install is complete, you lose control over what the user may or may not add, how, or why. What they add through portage, what they add to /usr/local manually, is out of your control. I just wish that you (meaning all devs and council) consider user's thoughts and needs a little more. Don't just consider how to protect against every possible outcome or eventuality. Make Gentoo more open. Speaking unofficially, IMVHO, Sunrise accomplishes that. -- Peter -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
