Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
On 10/22/2013 09:48 AM, Sergey Popov wrote: > 20.10.2013 18:31, hasufell пишет: >> Gamerlay is not related to the games team > > I am sorry, but it is games team not related to gamerlay. No offense, > but gamerlay guys sometims just do their job. > > So, MAKE it related to Games team and fix stuff, considered broken. > >> gamerlay which is a project that has failed. > > Please, do not throw such sentences without objective clarification, thanks. > >> I have zero interest to work on gamerlay. > > So, this is your personal attitude to be against of gamerlay. We have > got this, thanks. > Again, lets stop here please. I think we proved that the Gentoo dev community as a whole is not hostile to user community overlays/projects. -- Regards, Markos Chandras
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
On 10/22/2013 09:54 AM, Sergey Popov wrote: > 20.10.2013 20:12, hasufell пишет: >> This thread is derailed and I have no further interest in discussing here. >> > > And again, no offense, but it is not the first time when you are jumped, > said, "Everything in X is wrong!" and then said "I have lost interest". > It is very "mature" position to propose enhancement and then - hides, do > not you think? > > Sorry if i am saying harsh words, just talking how it looks like from > side view. > No need to escallate this further. People can form their own opinions on the subject. -- Regards, Markos Chandras
[gentoo-dev] mobile-phone herd needs help
Hi folks, I'm currently the only dev in mobile-phone, and I don't actually use any of the packages in the herd (I added myself just to keep the packages from going into m-n, but I don't have the time to attend to the bugs lately). There aren't too many bugs assigned to the herd at this point. If nobody joins, I will be removing myself and we'll do the usual herd-removal procedure within the next couple weeks. Chris Reffett
[gentoo-dev] app-dicts herd is empty
Looks like it's empty for some time. If nobody joins to it, I will proceed with dissolving the herd in a week or so Thanks
Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs
Am Sat, 19 Oct 2013 19:10:51 +0300 schrieb Panagiotis Christopoulos : > On 10:43 Sat 19 Oct , Daniel Campbell wrote: > > On 10/19/2013 10:32 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > >... > > > x11-wm/fluxbox > > > > I'm not a developer (but have a completed dev test that doesn't know > > where to go...). I'm interested in nabbing x11-wm/fluxbox (and any > > related projects that are still alive). I use Fluxbox daily and > > keep an eye on upstream. It'd be nice to be able to contribute > > something worthwhile to Gentoo, even if it's just one package (for > > now). > > I'll add myself to fluxbox and probably everything related to fluxbox > but as u know I'm not so active nowadays so anyone who is willing, > should add him/herself too. > > @Daniel, you can help by proxy-maintaining fluxbox or if you want to > become a gentoo developer I can mentor you if you don't find someone > else in your timezone. > > By the way, are you sure, guys, you want to remove the desktop-wm > herd at all? > I take x11-wm/icewm and x11-themes/icewm-themes Cheers -- Lars Wendler Gentoo package maintainer signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] News item about Gnome 3.8
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > The last revision includes this reference: > "The guide will also show you > how to migrate to systemd as it is the only supported setup now." > > But the news item cannot contain all the information needed for that -> > people need to read the pointed guide for that :/ WFM. I think the key is to highlight classes of users who should take the time to look at the guide. If somebody has been through many Gnome upgrades, in what way is this upgrade not like all the others? Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] News item about Gnome 3.8
El mar, 22-10-2013 a las 08:02 -0400, Rich Freeman escribió: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > >> On Tue, 22 Oct 2013, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > > >> Lets compare it with the 2.32 one that looks to were valid in the > >> past: > > > > That we had less than optimal news items in the past doesn't mean that > > we shouldn't do better now. > > I also think that the need to move to systemd is certainly worth a mention. > > I don't think news items need to be completely self-contained, but > they should include any significant issues. Changing an init system > and re-configuring all your daemons is certainly a significant issue. > > Rich > > The last revision includes this reference: "The guide will also show you how to migrate to systemd as it is the only supported setup now." But the news item cannot contain all the information needed for that -> people need to read the pointed guide for that :/
Re: [gentoo-dev] OT: user-developer/privileges in IRC
Dirkjan Ochtman schrieb: > On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 4:55 PM, yac wrote: >> Now I wonder if the +m on IRC was set proactively or reactively. If the >> former it could be worth a try to -m. > Yeah, I kind of feel it should be -m, as well. If need be, we can be > more proactive about kickbanning people (ops enough, after all). We had -m for a short period this year already. AFAIR users then came into the channel and asked support or ebuild development questions, so it was reverted to +m. Best regards, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
Re: [gentoo-dev] OT: user-developer/privileges in IRC
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 4:55 PM, yac wrote: > Now I wonder if the +m on IRC was set proactively or reactively. If the > former it could be worth a try to -m. Yeah, I kind of feel it should be -m, as well. If need be, we can be more proactive about kickbanning people (ops enough, after all). Cheers, Dirkjan
Re: [gentoo-dev] OT: user-developer/privileges in IRC
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 13:02:29 +0400 Sergey Popov wrote: > 22.10.2013 07:19, Peter Stuge пишет: > > I should have included bugzilla among mailing lists+IRC, users can > > indeed also have elevated privileges on IRC, but never equal to > > developers. It is radical exclusion and I'm reminded of it every > > time the #gentoo-dev channel mode catches my eye, painfully so if > > there's a discussion I could perhaps contribute to. Most of the time > > it is easy enough to say something privately to a relevant > > developer, but that's still very different from actual > > participation. > > > > Yes, and i think that it was done for a reason. Now I wonder if the +m on IRC was set proactively or reactively. If the former it could be worth a try to -m. > But nobody stops you > from requesting temporarily voice on #gentoo-dev and when you > contributions will be marked as significant - gentoo/contributor > cloak, that will give you permanent voice in #gentoo-dev. > > You should understand that #gentoo-dev is channel for developer's > communication primarily and it is not so restricted, as you think. > > For example, #gentoo-infra is totally restricted to developers only, > other interested parties should be added to channel ACLs explicitly or > should get invite there. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: official games repository
Peter Stuge posted on Tue, 22 Oct 2013 05:19:01 +0200 as excerpted: > Rich Freeman wrote: >> [Peter Stuge posted...] >>> >>> Everything in the Gentoo project is per definition strictly >>> developer-only. I suppose that it's a function of having the project >>> centered around a foundation. >> >> I can't think of any reason that the Foundation would have anything to >> do with who can and cannot participate in anything related to Gentoo. Good catch. I was confused by that wording as well, but thought of "foundation" in the sense of (physical) underlying superstructure as opposed to (social/legal) organization, because "Gentoo Foundation" in the social/legal sense, for those knowing about it at all, indeed doesn't make sense here. But it's good to put an end to that speculation directly, since otherwise it's likely spread further confusion in the future. > The reason I had in mind is indeed the all-or-nothing security model for > the publications (ebuilds is what I had in mind, I should have written > "Everything I know in the Gentoo project...", sorry about that!) where > even Copyright seems to have to be assigned to the foundation. That has actually been debated here from time to time, and the general agreement seems to be that assigning copyright to the Gentoo Foundation is recommended (for various reasons), but specifically *NOT* required, in part because some gentoo devs (Greg KH was one who specifically stated he'd probably have to resign from being a gentoo dev in that case, I'd guess due to the work-for-hire clauses in his employment contract which allow him to contribute to FLOSS projects but NOT to surrender copyright, which as a work-for-hire, remains with his employer) would very likely be unable to participate were that the case. While there's also ethical arguments to be made on either side, the practical effect of triggering the resignation of multiple gentoo devs were copyright assignment forced, basically put an end to the discussion. >> Gentoo projects have involved non-developers from time to time. The >> documentation project even gives commit access to non-developers, > > Awesome! I'm really glad that I was wrong about that - but at the same > time documentation tends to serve a bootstrapping function, > and thus matter less over time. [The actual reason I bothered replying as it's core to the debate at hand.] It's worth noting that one of the big reasons projects use overlays is to allow non-devs more, in some cases basically full, access. As covered below that's simply not practical in the main tree, but under the relatively narrower confines and tighter direct supervision of a project overlay, active project users very often work hand in hand with full gentoo devs as effective co-equals in the project overlay. Of course users do have to have a bit of history with the project before they gain that level of trust, but once they get it, they may well get full access to the overlay, with the only differences between what they can do and what a full dev can do being that a dev can transfer to the main tree, and of course also that if there ever /were/ a disagreement that got to the point of "me or him", the dev would most likely win, but of course everyone knows that so in practice it doesn't tend to get to that point. However, project overlays are entirely under the control of that project, which means it's up to them what the rules are. Projects such as kde (the one I'm most familiar with in that regard, but there are others) really depend quite heavily on the work of trusted users who really do a lot of the actual grunt work in the overlay, while others are I believe gentoo-dev-only. So it ends up being a project decision. If the devs in the games project aren't comfortable with user write access, their overlay, their rules, and it won't happen. If they are, their overlay, their rules, and it will. Which is what this whole thread is about. Apparently the games project devs aren't comfortable with user access, at least not enough to make the existing user-controlled overlay a viable official project overlay, so if they want an overlay, they will need to create a new one. Perhaps at some point they'll /get/ comfortable with having trusted user access and gamerlay might tighten up access a bit so they can merge, but at this point, a new, seperate devs-only overlay seems to be what they have in mind, and as they'll be making the decisions, that's very likely what they'll get. >> The way our current portage tree is set up basically forces us into an >> all-or-nothing security model for commit access - we don't have layers >> of integration testing to protect users from errors or abuses. >> >> Proxy maintainership is one way around this. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
Re: [gentoo-dev] News item about Gnome 3.8
On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 2:52 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >> On Tue, 22 Oct 2013, Pacho Ramos wrote: > >> Lets compare it with the 2.32 one that looks to were valid in the >> past: > > That we had less than optimal news items in the past doesn't mean that > we shouldn't do better now. I also think that the need to move to systemd is certainly worth a mention. I don't think news items need to be completely self-contained, but they should include any significant issues. Changing an init system and re-configuring all your daemons is certainly a significant issue. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
On Tue, 22 Oct 2013 04:10:36 +0200 Peter Stuge wrote: > Tom Wijsman wrote: > > There is an alternative solution here; and that is to bring reviewed > > versions of them to the Portage tree or official games repository, > > and honor their contributions. That is a win-win situation for both > > of you. > > I'm afraid that's too naive. :\ Why? I'm afraid you have misread what I wrote; or, maybe we're not thinking on the same wave length about this. Gentoo Developers already do this work constantly; when they bring in new ebuilds from Bugzilla, review proxied maintainer's work, ... > I have significant experience from contributors in several other > projects who aren't interested in higher quality standards than > their own. They will infallably find a way to continue their work > as they see fit, with the case in point being gamerlay. I do not state that they are or should be interested. My alternative solution doesn't have to involve contributor interaction. > Someone interested in maintaining higher standards will need to > maintain such higher standards on their own, experience shows that > zero percent of that effort is absorbed by those contributors who are > content with lower standards - they more or less explicitly state > that they do not want to learn how to attain higher quality. That's what I was suggesting: Use their work honoring them; but, do not give them back reviews or feedback as they don't want that. > Unless one has actually been in this position I think it may be > difficult to understand how extremely demotivating it is to keep > cleaning up after people who do not want to learn. It is neither > sustainable for a single person nor for a team. I feel the opposite, it is often easier to start from ebuilds that already work than to start from those that don't; as at that point you only need to apply testing and QA practices. Whereas otherwise you would need to reinvent the wheel, what others have already done before you. This is at least how others and I handle ebuilds and patches that are provided; but yes, I also see people that rather start from scratch. It's kind of a personal opinion thing, and I believe both approaches are a good way; the existence of one shouldn't exclude the other... > If there's infrastructure to support it I'm strongly in favor of > letting everyone do what they like to do, a sort of live and let > live. There's always going to be so; eg. GitHub, but even with the existence of such infrastructure we actually won't need it, because the gamerlay project is backed by Gentoo Developers so I doubt there will be deprecation of it any time soon. Indeed, let it live. > The question is why high quality would matter. It does for the Portage tree or official overlays that intend to deal with quite a large audience, it doesn't have to be so for gamerlay. -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] OT: user-developer/privileges in IRC
22.10.2013 07:19, Peter Stuge пишет: > I should have included bugzilla among mailing lists+IRC, users can > indeed also have elevated privileges on IRC, but never equal to > developers. It is radical exclusion and I'm reminded of it every > time the #gentoo-dev channel mode catches my eye, painfully so if > there's a discussion I could perhaps contribute to. Most of the time > it is easy enough to say something privately to a relevant developer, > but that's still very different from actual participation. > Yes, and i think that it was done for a reason. But nobody stops you from requesting temporarily voice on #gentoo-dev and when you contributions will be marked as significant - gentoo/contributor cloak, that will give you permanent voice in #gentoo-dev. You should understand that #gentoo-dev is channel for developer's communication primarily and it is not so restricted, as you think. For example, #gentoo-infra is totally restricted to developers only, other interested parties should be added to channel ACLs explicitly or should get invite there. -- Best regards, Sergey Popov Gentoo developer Gentoo Desktop Effects project lead Gentoo Qt project lead Gentoo Proxy maintainers project lead signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
20.10.2013 20:12, hasufell пишет: > This thread is derailed and I have no further interest in discussing here. > And again, no offense, but it is not the first time when you are jumped, said, "Everything in X is wrong!" and then said "I have lost interest". It is very "mature" position to propose enhancement and then - hides, do not you think? Sorry if i am saying harsh words, just talking how it looks like from side view. -- Best regards, Sergey Popov Gentoo developer Gentoo Desktop Effects project lead Gentoo Qt project lead Gentoo Proxy maintainers project lead signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
20.10.2013 19:22, hasufell пишет: > I am not sure if you have read my list of arguments in the first post. > Sunrise is based on that very concept. No user has direct commit > access to the reviewed repository, for good reason (not sure what you > mean with "developer-only"). > So, what's the problem about adding such reviewed repo(more specifically - a branch) to gamerlay except your personal negative attitude to whole project itself? -- Best regards, Sergey Popov Gentoo developer Gentoo Desktop Effects project lead Gentoo Qt project lead Gentoo Proxy maintainers project lead signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] official games repository
20.10.2013 18:31, hasufell пишет: > Gamerlay is not related to the games team I am sorry, but it is games team not related to gamerlay. No offense, but gamerlay guys sometims just do their job. So, MAKE it related to Games team and fix stuff, considered broken. > gamerlay which is a project that has failed. Please, do not throw such sentences without objective clarification, thanks. > I have zero interest to work on gamerlay. So, this is your personal attitude to be against of gamerlay. We have got this, thanks. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
