Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo commit in xml/htdocs/proj/en/qa: index.xml
> On Fri, 10 Jun 2011, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > I like the idea of appointed leads instead of holding elections, it > fits into my big picture of less bureaucracy and more meritocracy > (see my email re running for council on -project). Appointments > would be made by the "next level up" from the lead. So project leads > would come from the council, subproject leads from the project, etc. What problem are you trying to solve? There maybe some point doing this for projects that have elevated powers (like QA or devrel), but I think for normal projects our current system works well enough. Ulrich
[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo commit in xml/htdocs/proj/en/qa: index.xml
Il giorno sab, 11/06/2011 alle 01.48 +0100, Markos Chandras ha scritto: > > I am sorry but this is not a way for a leader to treat the members of > his team. I am retiring myself from QA as well. Do note that 4 members > have already gone from QA. This cannot be a coincidence. > For those who wouldn't get qa@g.o mail, Tomáš has also requested retirement from qa, in http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=368097#c66 : > Markos for one you and vapier are the reason why i left the team because > otherwise i would have to kick both of you out. So I'd like to know how you can even pretend to count four members when: - one retired because other members of the team decided to do as they like; - two has been kicked out for playing along just if they can also make the rules (as soon as a rule was enacted that they didn't like they decided to ignore it, even under request to either not do so or be removed from QA); - you decided to retire because I applied a warning I had sent in advance (on April 30th). Or maybe are you counting Sven who I haven't heard from in a year or two, and whose autorepoman mail has stopped coming ... probably before you ever became a developer? Maybe I scream in private, but what you three (keeping Tomáš out of this) are doing is crying in public because you're no longer allowed to poop in the sandbox you should keep clean. Do note that it was even your words: > I am sorry but having elections every few months is not a solution. > First we need to clean up the team, then become "team", then have > elections. Which is exactly what I'm going to do: I'm going to make sure that the team is on the same page: policies has to be followed, or they need to be changed. Which doesn't look like either of them (nor you I guess) want to do. I'm pretty sure I didn't ask much to the team beside actually following what the council decided. Finally, I'd like to point out that neither my character nor my actions have changed the slightest since the mail that Peper quoted — yet I was elected as team leader; it looks like though people wanted me to scream at anyone else beside them — too easy that way. And the only two people in the team who bothered to cast a vote (Luca and Christian), seems not to have an issue with me keeping this way. So, this might hurt your feelings, but I'm not really sorry to see you leave. As I said before I had been disappointed when people I had a high esteem of decided that rules shouldn't apply to them. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo package statistics -- GSoC 2011
On Sat, Jun 11, 2011 at 01:10:36AM +0200, Sebastian Pipping wrote: > On 06/08/2011 04:36 PM, Vikraman wrote: > > * Repository, Keyword, Useflags (plus,minus,unset), Counter, Size, > > and Build time for each installed package > > How many operations do you expect for a submissions with 1000 packages > on SQL level? Will that be around 1000 inserts? > One insert for each package entry, and one insert for every useflag. > Best, > > > > Sebastian > -- Vikraman signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo commit in xml/htdocs/proj/en/qa: index.xml
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 06/09/2011 08:54 PM, Piotr Jaroszyński wrote: > On 9 June 2011 15:44, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: >> Given the lead is held responsible for the behaviour of the team's >> member in respect to the QA work, I don't think it is unexpected of the >> lead to remove those people who have shown no intention to collaborate. >> >> Beside, I warned both of you that you had to follow policy or get out, >> neither of you even _bothered_ replying to my request. > > On 04/18/2010 03:31 PM, Diego Elio “Flameeyes” Pettenò wrote: >>> Diego, you were nominated as well. Do you accept? >> >> Muahhahaha — no I don't think it would be a good idea. It would almost >> certainly end up with a pissing-off contest between me and council or me >> and devrel depending on their position > > Guess you were right after all. > I am sorry but this is not a way for a leader to treat the members of his team. I am retiring myself from QA as well. Do note that 4 members have already gone from QA. This cannot be a coincidence. - -- Regards, Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJN8rtpAAoJEPqDWhW0r/LCZ40P+wUFxLCUr1faz1E1QwpNpvi9 c7keRqI8KGGIwW1x1EPypK1dXJbxvhpBoiZzMrI6PQin1iA8wqEO0A8vxphRGwTB efK5YtKVH8pT/KG47noy/Hb+subIdpo50Hlj6S6Osf7Fw3uIkjwgSx9xgTxInHKZ y3FuBLuhrLCZhhJc2qruf/4Dl1Vlkq4OtMiggs2PAh0zfsCcnxhg4ddsTaPlzqo4 dyLUX56k8RTuLX0e5WYtEme6Qi9SbUDK9RkInoRKjWi2MqUqN79WFHCQrbpzx2Zw b8CEGG2jkBKwC35BIdJ4EqNtZ30EgbjVGOqDjILkFrkFIy8hyaNIBdIQK0rgfzD8 h8SggwqZ5wYkHY957JcgH3Fr1LcHtvHeXd4QdYUUkmqcdOJZDL1BFi+IHK/ms20W m/SCmZ7UEOjHPtxvsICkDosqnVtaSKOAQSZ3BIfaUYHIDlnm+KdioTejQ2Eiw/vj 1PHh1kKX2BOe78wvlAjWBSCzAI4lBoMpaLd5Lcs+YhAn91FkQRNSqUBPzgnbSdLt 8RYUcUjAhv6Tw9OYGm8+19sx/grt1HNfj07uUL2Vx02wKY1/eyFA5iOVvtHSAZZI Kuh3HBce1SeKYbUDiOh61K1QVGgjpHuo+70aHG8MxKtN5ga9o6BORQF6EQBdrW99 t0prmys52YyY0pGo4ylF =xzyy -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo package statistics -- GSoC 2011
On 06/08/2011 04:36 PM, Vikraman wrote: > * Repository, Keyword, Useflags (plus,minus,unset), Counter, Size, > and Build time for each installed package How many operations do you expect for a submissions with 1000 packages on SQL level? Will that be around 1000 inserts? Best, Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo commit in xml/htdocs/proj/en/qa: index.xml
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 9:05 AM, Dane Smith wrote: > Perhaps do council appointments if the lead steps down / if the team > calls for a re-appointment (there would need to be rules for this part. > I don't want to see a new "appointee" merely because the lead upset one > person. Perhaps if more than 50% of the team or like 10 other developers > are asking for a new lead or some such foo.) > > ... > > Lastly, given that it will be the lead for a given team, I think that > team should have the ability to pick their "candidates" to go to > council, and maybe just give Council the vote on who gets it. Or, have > council appoint people they think are fit, and the team can vote from > there. Either way I think would work alright. I also dislike the general election idea, for the reasons you state. I think the ideal process is something like: 1. Teams put forth recommendations for who THEY would like to see as the lead, perhaps with more than one choice. 2. The Council is free to pick any lead they like, and change that lead any time they like. 3. However, the Council is encouraged that unless there is a big reason not to do so, they just accept or choose from the team's nominations, and only do so annually. I don't like the concept of the council only getting to ratify a decision already made by the team. This will just lead to more bickering on the lists about the wrong people being on the team or whatever and the fox being in charge of the henhouse or whatever. The Council has a mandate, because they are elected. You can disagree with the Council, but you can't argue that their decisions don't have SOME kind of backing simply because they have been selected by the dev community as a whole. By giving the Council ultimate authority (and accountability) that mandate then is conferred upon the team leads for QA, Devrel, etc. This is not unlike how any business or similar concern is run. Teams usually know best how they should be run, but they still fall under the board or whatever and as long as they're doing a good job boards generally just rubber-stamp their recommendations. When things go wrong, then the board takes a more active role, even to the point of completely overriding the team if that is what it takes to fix things - but usually they just put somebody in charge that they feel will handle things. Government isn't a good example as it tends to be dominated by cronyism, and I think there is general agreement that this is NOT how we want things to work. The council should not generally fiddle with every little thing QA does, or whatever, but they can step in when the issue is serious. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] profiles/ChangeLog is too large
On 09-06-2011 21:39:43 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > The profiles/ChangeLog file has grown to more than 700 kbytes. Would > it make sense to remove ancient (say, pre-2010) entries from it? Perhaps you can generalise the discussion into when you do consider a changelog entry to (still) be relevant? I guess figuring out something here is useful both now as well as in the future. -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level
Re: [gentoo-dev] ChangeLog generation - pros and cons (council discussion request)
On 09-06-2011 18:06:02 +0200, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > > > If typos matter then they matter to everybody, and if they don't then > > > we should not care. QA in Gentoo should be a consistent experience. > > > > while the last sentence is true, the first is not. if a minority of > > people care about typos, and/or they rarely fix said typos, then the > > logical answer is that their opinion loses out. it doesnt mean that > > everyone agrees. > > -mike > > you will surely agree then- if a minority of people thinks ebuild > removals should not go into the changelog, their opinion just loses > out. Right? > > Anyway. You and Samuli are at the moment just wasting everyone's time > here. Please don't mix threads. This thread is just about what we should do with ChangeLogs (if, and if, how to generate them) not about a particular preference of documenting things or not. So far, this thread was reasonably made of constructive, and sort of objective replies. It would be nice, and probably most useful for the council, if we could keep it this way. -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo commit in xml/htdocs/proj/en/qa: index.xml
On 09:05 Fri 10 Jun , Dane Smith wrote: > Part of me thinks this is a good idea for the simple reason that some > people seem to have issues with QA/DevRel. Perhaps if the lead were > "appointed by council" there would be less raging every time the team > tried to do anything. But then again, we can't all play nice over a > freaking ChangeLog, even with Council making the call, so I somehow > doubt this will fix *anything at all* > > Having said that, council appointments for the team lead may not be a > bad idea. We're starting to get into -project material here, but given the thread started here I'll keep it here... I like the idea of appointed leads instead of holding elections, it fits into my big picture of less bureaucracy and more meritocracy (see my email re running for council on -project). Appointments would be made by the "next level up" from the lead. So project leads would come from the council, subproject leads from the project, etc. > Perhaps do council appointments if the lead steps down / if the team > calls for a re-appointment (there would need to be rules for this > part. I don't want to see a new "appointee" merely because the lead > upset one person. Perhaps if more than 50% of the team or like 10 > other developers are asking for a new lead or some such foo.) I'd suggest that there shouldn't be any "term limit" on a lead, and no need to have re-elections or re-confirmations yearly or otherwise. A majority of the team can petition the council for a re-appointment at any time, but the council is not required to act on it. Unpopular actions doesn't equal wrong actions. > Lastly, given that it will be the lead for a given team, I think that > team should have the ability to pick their "candidates" to go to > council, and maybe just give Council the vote on who gets it. Or, have > council appoint people they think are fit, and the team can vote from > there. Either way I think would work alright. Perhaps interested people on the team could just say they want to be lead, and the council would pick one of them. I think leadership should come from the top. -- Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Sr. Developer, Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.com pgph7SFlBjLvo.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reviving webapp-config
On Thu, 9 Jun 2011 16:37:46 -0500 Matthew Summers wrote: > After consultation and discussion at length with several developers, I > am writing to announce the impending revival of the tool known as > app-admin/webapp-config effective immediately. You might want to chuck it out and start from scratch... Much of the difficulty with the original webapp-config was that it was designed to work on Windows. Stuart's plan was to create a distribution and operating system independent way of dealing with web apps, sort of like CPAN; Gentoo was merely the testbed. If your goals don't match that, you're probably better rethinking everything than trying to revive something that was designed for a completely different purpose. -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reviving webapp-config
On 06/10/2011 05:38 PM, Matthew Summers wrote: >> Why did you choose how you did? > > I do not understand this sentence, I intended to write "as you did", sorry. If that's still bad English: I wanted to hear about your rationale, which you have explained by now. Thanks. > [..] this tool has an > important role in Gentoo and therefore needs to be revived. I wished people were thinking like that about genkernel :-) Best, Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo commit in xml/htdocs/proj/en/qa: index.xml
El 10/06/11 17:33, Francisco Blas Izquierdo Riera (klondike) escribió: > * Diego, Berlusconi a way better reason to be outraged I think. Small clarification here: I'm not comparing Diego with Berlusconi AFAIK he isn't a corrupt underage fucking politician, I'm pointing him Berlusconi ruling Italy is a quite good reason to fight against compared to adding some lines in a file. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reviving webapp-config
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 6:49 AM, Sebastian Pipping wrote: > Questions: > > - What does reviving mean in detail? > A re-write? A somewhat compatible re-write? I am not necessarily interested in a complete re-write unless its really warranted due to support for new features. First things first, webapp-config needs to have the open bugs addressed and current functionality should be supported. > Getting back to maintaining the current code? There is some good code in there, so I think at minimum some of that will be maintained moving forward. Regardless, the current codebase should be audited, bugs fixed, and a new design spec incorporating the new features desired needs to be written in collaboration with various stake holders. > Why did you choose how you did? I do not understand this sentence, but will try to explain the choices a bit. Having used webapp-config for 7 years or so, I had grown fond of it for managing things like drupal (back in the day) and for handling static media for my company projects. As time progressed, it seemed reasonable to extend the functionality of w-c to do fancier things like change tracking or byte-compiling python modules outside of site-packages for multi-instance and potentially multi-versioned deployments of the various pythonic webapps I manage. It seems reasonable to roll this sort of functionality into the existing tool. I am not intending to make this something specific to python webapps, just to be clear, but include tools to handle webapps written in ruby/rails, perl, etc. Additionally, Gentoo's infra team uses w-c for a few things and its a nice tool that mostly integrates well into cfengine (afaik). Whatever the case with automation, it does make management tasks easier (perhaps IMO). Further, there are substantial applications, like Moodle, that would benefit from a more robust deployment toolkit within Gentoo. So, in general, from both a distribution and a professional perspective its quite clear (at least to me), that this tool has an important role in Gentoo and therefore needs to be revived. > > - Have you spoken to Andreas Nüsslein who worked on a > re-write in context of an earlier GSoC? I have not. I was unaware of this project until it was mentioned in replies to this thread. I have started reading the code. Perhaps there are some elements of Andreas' code we can incorporate into the w-c codebase. I need to dig into the code far more than my cursory glance. > > Best, > > > > > Sebastian > > Good questions Sebastian, thanks. Matthew W. Summers Gentoo Foundation Inc.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo commit in xml/htdocs/proj/en/qa: index.xml
I was thinking of writting this in private, but I bet it will do more good if I do it public. I'm 22 (most of you could call me a kid) and a reasonably recent new developer and I'm sad having to ask you, am I the only one seeing childishness on your actions, and this yours implies at least Samuli, Mike and Diego and probably many others. You are discussing and reveling for a stupid file, even worse, its not even code and solutions to automate the process have been proposed so you are discussing over nothing. If you guys want to rebel I can give you many good reasons which are meaningful that a few lines of something that's not even code: * Mike your country considers freedom of speech a restrictable right, maybe you should fight and rebel against that instead of a stupid file. * Samuli, extremist right wing parties are gaining power in your country, I think this is a way better reason to rebel than a stupid file. * Diego, Berlusconi a way better reason to be outraged I think. I know this will serve for nothing you are going to keep discussing over pride? 10 minutes of your live? instead of fighting what really should matter you. It is up to you, meanwhile I'll keep fighting for the camped people in Spain instead of some random piece of documentation. Have a nice day. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reviving webapp-config
On Fri, Jun 10, 2011 at 7:49 AM, Sebastian Pipping wrote: > Questions: > > - What does reviving mean in detail? > A re-write? A somewhat compatible re-write? > Getting back to maintaining the current code? > Why did you choose how you did? > > - Have you spoken to Andreas Nüsslein who worked on a > re-write in context of an earlier GSoC? > IIRC, last year's GSoC featured a project involving the rewrite of webapp-config. Andreas was the student, but I don't recall right now who the mentor was. Maybe this would be a good start! > Best, > > > > > Sebastian > > Best regards, -- Jesus Rivero (Neurogeek) Gentoo Developer
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo commit in xml/htdocs/proj/en/qa: index.xml
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 06/10/11 07:44, Sebastian Pipping wrote: > On 06/09/2011 03:37 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> do we need some kind of policy around membership on "special" >> project teams. QA and Devrel are the most obvious examples, Infra might >> be another. > > in my eyes we do. too much power to be unregulated. > > what does it take to get this rolling? Part of me thinks this is a good idea for the simple reason that some people seem to have issues with QA/DevRel. Perhaps if the lead were "appointed by council" there would be less raging every time the team tried to do anything. But then again, we can't all play nice over a freaking ChangeLog, even with Council making the call, so I somehow doubt this will fix *anything at all* I do not want to see "elections" for 3 team leads. As far as I'm concerned, it's way too much of a hassle. Having said that, council appointments for the team lead may not be a bad idea. Maybe it will work. I doubt it, but I'm open to try it. My fear there is I don't want to see team leads changing every year just because there is a new council. If the team is working well together, there is no sense in fubaring that merely because we "can". Perhaps do council appointments if the lead steps down / if the team calls for a re-appointment (there would need to be rules for this part. I don't want to see a new "appointee" merely because the lead upset one person. Perhaps if more than 50% of the team or like 10 other developers are asking for a new lead or some such foo.) Also, while I like the idea of "cleaning" out those teams once in a while for inactive members, I'm not a huge fan of a new lead coming in and removing people from the team just because. Lastly, given that it will be the lead for a given team, I think that team should have the ability to pick their "candidates" to go to council, and maybe just give Council the vote on who gets it. Or, have council appoint people they think are fit, and the team can vote from there. Either way I think would work alright. Just my 2 cents. Regards, - -- Dane Smith (c1pher) Gentoo Linux Developer -- QA / Crypto / Sunrise / x86 RSA Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?search=0x0C2E1531&op=index -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJN8haaAAoJEEsurZwMLhUxBssQAINmFDp4jYccbNlVmb6iu4QI 4n4Dlg5BXFhIGJu0gCc+Vx7YxvyL+5stNJthKqpeE1ics/2yhBHK/Jc+DTDLyM2G CrYDIC2oS+4spa/DgG0/LDW6RlpLObl3cTnYDtyXq6Fu3+uKTXFm2KIghhHA18cX WHUZRyuocIhkMFvQzIwrddzx8UYvtlFJCB0CUu6ke4/5YE/Q7yBEXEt7GlMNHA5o gwxATVoyyN4M+Q2rxQXuv2IeW9X5DCjOP5LyT6sbOanYPSAgr+95MTxoGZ8LtJu9 iODYN85C/4DaNtyhFvzYA2KtlywRKH1fJwChCPVlIq3SuEdJvpQ6zvvS2UdSm6no qc8oyZEEI076dOiSnT69cyLrsXm9gRY3tIyh1pHmfYzKVVi89yrMzCpKOEd8GL2v V9Xss4JJBZbi60HfYp3gJqozhK6btSsbJ7sH3Kl66nTkownwSEZVigzurAOm+ct5 r7/zKQR8s/fUtFP6bVprDgJpQKMi4TMPYgti6IM7g2iAYfK4v2JCFxUdf0QB/+Is F/XriVGcotvt85Mgj96uzn1I/U1OzrkRdUh30SHectJ91fEHOIVEu1QYbCIWZXKD 0UTJ2BUMZqvPW+8BuHb3G/sYu6iRsHbTKPLYa5vgw2V5nfgjU7fFP0XPEIgbCF/M 4+/PcKQUwBOiIpcl+NDc =8ajo -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Reviving webapp-config
Questions: - What does reviving mean in detail? A re-write? A somewhat compatible re-write? Getting back to maintaining the current code? Why did you choose how you did? - Have you spoken to Andreas Nüsslein who worked on a re-write in context of an earlier GSoC? Best, Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo commit in xml/htdocs/proj/en/qa: index.xml
On 06/09/2011 03:37 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > do we need some kind of policy around membership on "special" > project teams. QA and Devrel are the most obvious examples, Infra might > be another. in my eyes we do. too much power to be unregulated. what does it take to get this rolling? sebastian
