-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Caleb Cushing wrote: >> Bugzilla is a tool for developers to track progress, not for >> third-party distributions to track progress. You've forked the tree. >> That's fine. The license allows that. But it doesn't obligate us to >> adapt our tools to fit your purpose. > > I've done lots of version bump bugs over the years. my reasons for > doing so may have changed. But the general process has not. Does it > matter if I've forked? doesn't the package still need an update?
I think a lot (most?) of us agree that bugs shouldn't be closed until fixes hit the main tree. But it indeed does not matter that you've forked, so you shouldn't even have brought it up on the bug report. Bugs aren't a good way to keep in touch with developers, that's what irc is for. >> Your behavior on bug 260582 was clearly unacceptable. You >> seem to think that we owe you something. Please re-examine your >> premises. Donnie already told you he was working on it. Our job is not >> to support your distribution. It is to make the best distro for >> ourselves. In the case of xorg-server, that means getting something >> into the tree that works. A masked ebuild will in this case be more >> bother than it's worth because the mask would have to encompass a >> bunch of other packages. Which leads me on to the next paragraph... > > this and all the cases given are examples, and perhaps my behavior was > unacceptable. But I think the response to my bug was too. No gentoo > doesn't owe me or regen2, a thing. It might, however, owe users > something. I agree on committing ebuilds that work, that doesn't mean > I don't have the right to open a bug and watch for progress reports. No, you don't have that right. It's just how it usually works and how it should work IMO, but that doesn't entitle you to it. >> In many cases that's true, but on average, the QA of the tree is much >> better than overlays. > > I couldn't say... I suppose I agree yes on most overlays, but a few > are supposed to be more 'exceptional'. the biggest problem is the bugs > that result between ebuilds in the tree and those of overlays. like > one I filed on virtual/perl-Mime-Base64. or like how inkscape won't > build against 5.10, except with patches already in bugzilla, but both > cases seemed to be one of 'perl 5.10 isn't in the tree so we won't > fix' I think they should put it in before 5.10 is in the tree. put > that's just me. And they probably will, but as perl-5.10 isn't in the tree, there is no rush. Either way, it's the perl team's decision to go with the patch in bugzilla or some other option and when they do it, whether they make that decision consciously or are forced into it due to real life time-constraints. >> We Need Git. It would really ease the workflow of accepting user >> contributions if users could just set up their own overlay and sent me >> an email asking to merge their changesets. > > git's great. but I've actually found 'merging' changesets to be a bad > idea from people. It can lead to some really sloppy commits, and > merging is a less stringent review than cherry-picking patches. I've found that git's patches aren't really what we want in the case of bumping. For bug reports we usually ask for a patch against the last ebuild in the tree. Is there perhaps a way to make git do that automatically? >> You could >> have made thousands of commits already, fixing a substantial amount of >> the problems you've raised. > > thousands seem like a high number. I think I've been pushing an > average one 1 patch per day since january to the tree (my tree). > *laughing* I'm still the #1 contributor of git patches to funtoo. It's great that people are doing their own thing, but to get it into OUR tree it will need to be comitted to OUR tree by someone who has access to OUR tree. Patches are great, but commits are better. >> This isn't a quick fix. > >> You'll have to work with people and >> that can sometimes be frustrating. > > I already have to 'work' with these people, the difference would be > what? how much respect I get? in gentoo land having @gentoo.org seems > to mean something... if you don't have that, you seem to > auto-magically get less respect, than you would if you did have it. Your demands because of your feelings of entitlement are what are costing you respect. >> But you'll get to be part of the >> development process and you'll get to work with the things you care >> about. > > you mean I'll be part of 'a' development process and work on some of > the things I care about. Obviously stepping on other developers toes > seems to be a taboo. Yes, it's extremely frowned upon to step on another developers toes; Gentoo is not a one-man show. Would you like ME to stomp all over your tree? Didn't think so. Just so we're clear. I really hope you change your attitude and take Peter Alfredsen (loki_val) up on his generous offer. Marijn - -- Sarcasm puts the iron in irony, cynicism the steel. Marijn Schouten (hkBst), Gentoo Lisp project, Gentoo ML <http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-{lisp,ml} on FreeNode -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkmvsBoACgkQp/VmCx0OL2xGYQCfTcCXKZ7QOui0Btgkpj9AYBNt 8lMAnRbnWBP5i7tAzFRy68PWjrKPvij8 =n+6Y -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
