On 4/20/20 8:27 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > IMO it isn't really worth worrying about, because right now the main > limitation seems to be a lack of people working on projects, not 25 > devs who each want to re-implement go their own way...
This is another reason I think is so important the overlays in Gentoo. ::gentoo overlay can be the most stricter one. It is a fact that is more feasible to deliver software in overlays as already happen (for example gitlab, science stuff, ...). But should ::gentoo be confined to GNU, Linux and other OS base stuff? Lets look into a specific case for a distro where everything should be packaged and placed in an universal repository (crazy debian): https://packages.debian.org/buster/snapd There are very radical package pattern people there and looking into snapd we can see that upstream just regarded the package integration, bundling all necessary dependencies into it. So, even there, we can't find all the required go dependencies packaged... Actually, the dependencies are only those that undoubtedly could appear on ::gentoo. IMHO, there are many software that doesn't need to be in a ebuild, but the base pieces such as go, snapd, docker-ce, docker engine, are some examples of go tools that we need to have available in ::gentoo. The same happens for other platforms such as those mentioned in the subject of this email. In conclusion, I think that all the trouble about licenses and security will be always a growing challenge and a distro should adapt their tools to allow software being available in a better way than upstream provided. I think that the point here is about: - how to bring the software to an OS - how to manage the software in a better way - share knowledge and magnetize the community so Gentoo can grow and show how is so useful helping to deliver better software I'm very pleased for Gentoo!
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
