Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
* <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2003-11-21 05:40]: > Well portage has that, but one doesn't need to add these 'free' licenses > to it. And the automatic addition of accepted licenses doesn't work > yet, but I think it's under way. This was developed, because some games > need eula's accepted when installed. So if one adds license to the > ACCEPT_LICENSES or something like that. Then these ebuild does not need > ones acceptance before installing. I remember this being mentioned as in progress quite a while ago. I think it's a rather necessary part of a package management system, so I don't know why it's taking so long. You should be given the chance to `accept' the license before installing software. (Sure you can grep LICENSE foo.ebuild, but that's not the Gentoo way.) I know it's not a big deal most of the time, but it is important. I may not be a zealot of a particular philosophy (GNU, BSD, commercial, etc.) but I'm concerned enough to reject on principle something with the kind of licence that Borland put on Delphi a little while back [*]. Do I have anything like that on my Gentoo machines? I don't know because portage hasn't told me and I haven't bothered to check, but I do know that I don't on my NetBSD machines because pkgsrc only installs with the licences specified in ACCEPT_LICENSE in make.conf. Cheers David [*] something like "you can install this software for free [as in beer], but if so we reserve the right to come to your home/work and inspect your computer to check that you're using the software appropriately." Sure, this is probably a hypothetical worry, but less so if more software used it. Come to think of it isn't this what M$ wants to use? (except s/free/a fee/g) -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
On Friday 21 November 2003 00:12, Heschi Kreinick wrote: > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > >On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:37:08 +0200 Wayne Oliver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >| You can take an approach similar to debian simply put > >| them in a "non-free" folder in portage, possibly put a banner on > >| the ebuild informing the user tha it's "non-free" ??? > > > >Hmm, maybe we should implement a keyword in the ebuild that tells > > people under what licence a package is distributed. That way, it > > would be easy for the user to check and avoid > > non-Free-as-in-Stallman software if they were that way inclined. > > > >I propose that we call this keyword 'LICENSE' (US spelling seems to > > be policy...), add it to every ebuild and make repoman check that > > it's there. > > > >Oh, wait... > > If only the world were that simple. But in reality developers never, > ever anticipate user's needs that way :-/ > I mean, if they did there would be an ACCEPT_LICENSE setting > scheduled to be implemented in make.conf to do exactly what this guy > wants. But no...that would be too easy... > *heavy sigh* > Ah well. We can always dream, eh? > -Heschi Well portage has that, but one doesn't need to add these 'free' licenses to it. And the automatic addition of accepted licenses doesn't work yet, but I think it's under way. This was developed, because some games need eula's accepted when installed. So if one adds license to the ACCEPT_LICENSES or something like that. Then these ebuild does not need ones acceptance before installing. The other way that these licence issues are handled is the manual fetching of the source / binary package needed in some ebuilds. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:37:08 +0200 Wayne Oliver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | You can take an approach similar to debian simply put | them in a "non-free" folder in portage, possibly put a banner on | the ebuild informing the user tha it's "non-free" ??? Hmm, maybe we should implement a keyword in the ebuild that tells people under what licence a package is distributed. That way, it would be easy for the user to check and avoid non-Free-as-in-Stallman software if they were that way inclined. I propose that we call this keyword 'LICENSE' (US spelling seems to be policy...), add it to every ebuild and make repoman check that it's there. Oh, wait... If only the world were that simple. But in reality developers never, ever anticipate user's needs that way :-/ I mean, if they did there would be an ACCEPT_LICENSE setting scheduled to be implemented in make.conf to do exactly what this guy wants. But no...that would be too easy... *heavy sigh* Ah well. We can always dream, eh? -Heschi -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 23:37:08 +0200 Wayne Oliver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | You can take an approach similar to debian simply put | them in a "non-free" folder in portage, possibly put a banner on | the ebuild informing the user tha it's "non-free" ??? Hmm, maybe we should implement a keyword in the ebuild that tells people under what licence a package is distributed. That way, it would be easy for the user to check and avoid non-Free-as-in-Stallman software if they were that way inclined. I propose that we call this keyword 'LICENSE' (US spelling seems to be policy...), add it to every ebuild and make repoman check that it's there. Oh, wait... -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail:ciaranm at gentoo.org Web: http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
-> -Original Message- -> From: Hall Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -> Sent: 20 November 2003 23:11 -> -> Really, I think this Sergey guy's agenda is to make Gentoo -> as strict as -> Debian. Things like nForce drivers -- the "tainted" ones -- -> would NOT be -> distributed or even packaged by Gentoo. If you wanted them, -> you'd have to -> find them from some 3rd party and hope they're good. Given a strict -> interpretation of "free", could Gentoo even "endorse" a 3rd -> party ebuild ?? Hi No, I don't think that's the agenda. but if it were... You can take an approach similar to debian simply put them in a "non-free" folder in portage, possibly put a banner on the ebuild informing the user tha it's "non-free" ??? I am not arguing just making a point, I like the way gentoo is at the moment. Regards Wayne -- This message, including any attachments, may contain information which is confidential, private or privileged in nature. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not peruse, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments and please notify the sender immediately by e-mail, facsimile or telephone and destroy the original message. Any views in this communication are those of the sender except where the sender specifically states otherwise. Please note that the recipient must scan this e-mail and any attached files for viruses and the like. No liability of whatever nature is accepted for any loss, liability, damage or expense resulting directly or indirectly from this communication and/or the access and/or downloading of any attachments. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
-> -Original Message- -> From: Wayne Oliver [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -> -> GPL'ed software is Free as in freedom i.e. you can do with -> almost whatever -> you like excuse the typing the time 23:05 here GPL'ed software is Free as in freedom i.e. You can do almost anything you like with it. Regards Wayne -- This message, including any attachments, may contain information which is confidential, private or privileged in nature. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not peruse, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments and please notify the sender immediately by e-mail, facsimile or telephone and destroy the original message. Any views in this communication are those of the sender except where the sender specifically states otherwise. Please note that the recipient must scan this e-mail and any attached files for viruses and the like. No liability of whatever nature is accepted for any loss, liability, damage or expense resulting directly or indirectly from this communication and/or the access and/or downloading of any attachments. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
-> -Original Message- -> From: Hall Stevenson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -> Sent: 20 November 2003 22:50 -> -> At 03:06 PM 11/20/2003, you wrote: -> >brett holcomb wrote: -> >>Apology accepted but non-free does not equal warez in any -> sense of the -> >>workd. There is nothing wrong with commerical stuff as -> many people earn -> >>an honest living from it. -> > -> >As well as commercial is not the same as non-free. -> -> Outside of Debian, I think people consider software "free" -> if they can -> download it, use it, and NOT have to pay for it. I do at least. -> -> Adobe's Acrobat Reader or Netscape Navigator (v4.x, for -> example) are "free" -> in my opinion. They're not to you, are they ?? Same with Opera's web -> browser. Yes ?? -> Yes you right but consider the following Adobe Acrobat is Free as in free beer i.e. you don't have to pay for it. GPL'ed software is Free as in freedom i.e. you can do with almost whatever you like for a better explanation http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html Regards Wayne -- This message, including any attachments, may contain information which is confidential, private or privileged in nature. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not peruse, use, disseminate, distribute or copy this message or attachments and please notify the sender immediately by e-mail, facsimile or telephone and destroy the original message. Any views in this communication are those of the sender except where the sender specifically states otherwise. Please note that the recipient must scan this e-mail and any attached files for viruses and the like. No liability of whatever nature is accepted for any loss, liability, damage or expense resulting directly or indirectly from this communication and/or the access and/or downloading of any attachments. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
At 03:06 PM 11/20/2003, you wrote: brett holcomb wrote: Apology accepted but non-free does not equal warez in any sense of the workd. There is nothing wrong with commerical stuff as many people earn an honest living from it. As well as commercial is not the same as non-free. Outside of Debian, I think people consider software "free" if they can download it, use it, and NOT have to pay for it. I do at least. Adobe's Acrobat Reader or Netscape Navigator (v4.x, for example) are "free" in my opinion. They're not to you, are they ?? Same with Opera's web browser. Yes ?? Hall -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
Apology accepted but non-free does not equal warez in any sense of the workd. There is nothing wrong with commerical stuff as many people earn an honest living from it. On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 20:31:26 +0100 "Sergey V. Spiridonov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: brett holcomb wrote: Also, calling what Gentoo provides as warez and saying it doesn't meet the spirt is over the line of good form. We Apologize for misusing this word.. Please s/warez/non-free/g. I did not know it have abusive meaning. -- Best regards, Sergey Spiridonov -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
Sergey, you may be a free only advocate and use nothing but that. However, many of us do use non free software for many reasons - mainly because in some cases free software can not do what commerical does. Obviously you feel strongly about free only so I would suggest you go back to Debian as they seem to fit your philosopy and it's obvious Gentoo doesn't. Feel free to continue your search but Gentoo isn't for you. As far as wasted resources let us be the one who decides what is wasted on our systems, not you. Also, calling what Gentoo provides as warez and saying it doesn't meet the spirt is over the line of good form. We could call you a starry-eyed free software only zealot who is out of touch with reality but we haven't - instead we've attemped to answer you questions and put up with innuendos and running down Gentoo. It's obvious you are free-only - that's your choice. It's also obvious Gentoo isn't for you as many here have tried to politely point out. I would suggest you accept that Gentoo does't meet you critera and move on - go back to Debian and continue your search elsewhere. On Thu, 20 Nov 2003 19:52:47 +0100 "Sergey V. Spiridonov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Bryan Whitehead wrote: If your goal is to only have FSF approved licensed code so expensive. Resources, which can be utilized to improve or to support free software. But it is not just wasting of time and resources. Distributing (or advertising) non-free warez misleads users of a GNU based OS. So, it contradicts GNU programmers ethics. -- Best regards, Sergey Spiridonov -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 18:07, Sergey Spiridonov wrote: > Jason A. Pfeil wrote: > > And gentoo is that alternative. :-) > > Hope it can become one day. Who knows... what do you mean with that, gentoo is a extremely good alternative, and in many cases even better, just because debian came first doesent mean its best :) > > > > > > On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 11:31, Sergey Spiridonov wrote: > > > >>Luke Scharf wrote: > >> > >> > Currently I look for the alternative for the Debian. > > I have to admit, it is very difficult task :( > >>> > >>>In my experience, Debian is a very unique project. I've never seen > >>>anything quite like it -- in the Open Source community, or in the rest > >>>of the world. > >> > >>Sometimes(always?) it is good to have an alternative. -- Regards, Redeeman () ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail /\- against microsoft attachments -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
Sergey V. Spiridonov wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 23:58:45 +0100 "Sergey V. Spiridonov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | A lot of users tend to ignore GNU philosophy and interpret _free_ | software as in "free beer", not as in freedom. If you'd like a 'religious' distribution, may I suggest Debian GNU/Hurd? I already have one machine running Debian GNU/Hurd. Currently I look for the alternative for the Debian. I have to admit, it is very difficult task :( If your goal is to only have FSF approved licensed code running on your machine, gentoo would fit. Since it's source based you can just use self-restraint and not install 'evil' software that is based on 'evil' licenses... -- Bryan Whitehead Email:[EMAIL PROTECTED] WorkE:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 11:31, Sergey Spiridonov wrote: > Luke Scharf wrote: > > >>Currently I look for the alternative for the Debian. > >> > >>I have to admit, it is very difficult task :( > > > > In my experience, Debian is a very unique project. I've never seen > > anything quite like it -- in the Open Source community, or in the rest > > of the world. > > Sometimes(always?) it is good to have an alternative. It's a great project, and I really like their distribution and the quality work that goes on behind the scenes to make apt-get work so well. I also respect their process a great deal. I'd be happily running Debian (and maybe even contributing) if "stable" had the packages I need. Unless I've missed something major, though, the fellow who's looking for another Debian project is probably going to be disappointed. Their organization is unique. -Luke -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
And gentoo is that alternative. :-) --Jason On Thu, 2003-11-20 at 11:31, Sergey Spiridonov wrote: > Luke Scharf wrote: > > >>Currently I look for the alternative for the Debian. > >> > >>I have to admit, it is very difficult task :( > > > > In my experience, Debian is a very unique project. I've never seen > > anything quite like it -- in the Open Source community, or in the rest > > of the world. > > Sometimes(always?) it is good to have an alternative. -- Jason A. Pfeil[EMAIL PROTECTED] Senior Open Systems Engineer http://www.10East.com 10East, Inc. (904)220-DOCS -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
On Wed, 2003-11-19 at 18:18, Sergey V. Spiridonov wrote: > Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 23:58:45 +0100 "Sergey V. Spiridonov" > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > | A lot of users tend to ignore GNU philosophy and interpret _free_ > > | software as in "free beer", not as in freedom. > > > > If you'd like a 'religious' distribution, may I suggest Debian GNU/Hurd? > > I already have one machine running Debian GNU/Hurd. > Currently I look for the alternative for the Debian. > > I have to admit, it is very difficult task :( In my experience, Debian is a very unique project. I've never seen anything quite like it -- in the Open Source community, or in the rest of the world. -Luke -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
On Thursday 20 November 2003 09:20, Sumeet Singh Parmar wrote: (B> > moving. Until then, I really like MFC and .NET for rapid, feature-rich (B> > development. (B> (B> Thanks for the laugh Ric. I recommend to you the book 'After the Gold Rush' (B> and do look at the project progress chapter. MFC/.Net gets you into a mess (B> rapidly with its bloat-feature crap. (B> (B> I don't understand why programmers insist on code generation tools. (B> Software is a thoughtful process. RAD is a moniker for clueless managers. (B> (B> Ric, the test for you is: name me three design patterns that you've used in (B> your projects. (B (BThat's a bit unfair. I've been give a project to complete by yesterday that (Bmust run on Windows. You think straight C with the straight Win32 API is the (Bway to go? A Win32 guru could probably beat me in the end, but a .NET guru (Bwould beet the Win32 guru too. (B (BBesides talking about MFC & .NET as code generation tools is purely wrong. The (Bstandard IDE (VC) guides you into using code generation tools but it is (Bdefinately not a requirement. (B (BDesign patterns? I can't give you the well-known names, but I have definately (Bused three: (B* prototyping (B* use cases (B* ui logic data (B (BForgive me if any of the above are not design patterns but I quit university (Bafter 6 months. I've read many books, though, and use the good stuff even if (BI don't bother to remember who invented the methods. I don't need to remember (Bbecause I'll never be tested on it. (B (BJason (B (B-- (B[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 08:56:30PM +0100, Sergey V. Spiridonov wrote: > I meant, if managers discuss and vote for some amendment to Social > Contract, will they be able to carry out it? Some managers have indeed CVS access to the social contract, so if appropriate, they can update it. > Are they entitled to do such things? If, for some reason, the social contract should be updated, and the update has been discussed, then yes, they are entitled to do so. > As far as I understood, anyone can propose a change. Who is entitled to > accept it? That would be the management team (if you, with "accept", mean who will lead the discussion and act as the moderator). I'm sure Daniel will take on the discussion as he first wrote the contract, but there is no reason to hard-write rules for every single aspect. As you probably know, the more you write down, the more errors/difficulties you can introduce :) Sven Vermeulen -- ^__^ And Larry saw that it was Good. (oo) Sven Vermeulen (__) http://www.gentoo.org Gentoo Documentation Project pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
At 04:38 PM 11/19/2003, you wrote: Hall Stevenson wrote: At 03:07 PM 11/19/2003, you wrote: > This forum's name is fairly illustrative of it's purpose: to discuss issues relating to using the distribution. Before I decide, if I want to use a distribution, I want to know something about it. Here are my questions and I need answers to draw a conclusion. I'm willing to bet that most people choose a distro based on install ease, choice of packages, built-in tools, and so on -- NOT the "political" idealogy of the distro. How this can help *me*? Sorry, but I, as well as everyone else who's responded to you hasn't interpreted your questions as you looking for "help". It's you trying to get Gentoo's "religious" philosophy in regards to what "free" really means. As numerous people have told you, YOU'RE ASKING THE WRONG GROUP. These questions should be directed at the "management" of Gentoo. If you can't find out who they are -- I don't know either, nor do I care -- then go right to "the man", Daniel Robbins. Do you think what "most people do" is a good reason to change my criterions? You're obviously not the type to do what "most people do". :-) I believe people should use what is best for them and not have others decide for them. You ask below about using Windows because "most people" use it. That's not why I use it, mind you. I use it because it often is the best tool for my needs. BTW most people use MS Windows, do you follow advices you give to other people? I've got (4) working PCs at home. Mine dual-boots WinXP and Gentoo. My old PC dual-boots Win98 and Debian, but is running just Debian now. Another PC runs Mandrake and was originally setup to be a file server but since our two main PCs have many, many times the disc space, it's more or less just wasting electricity. Finally, my wife's PC runs WinXP alone. I also have a Sparc20 with Debian installed on it, but it's nor running. It's too loud... :-) Why do I have so many ?? Because *I* want to. *I* use what *I* want to use and I frankly don't give a rat's *ss about software freedom, free beer, and so on. If a tool I need works best on WinXP, I'm going to use WinXP. I *want* to use Linux across the board, but I know that it's not completely capable of replacing WinXP -- for my use. Regards Hall -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
Ben Maas wrote: First off, I'll agree that the management structure document itself is rather buried. I found it (http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/management-structure.xml) because I knew it was assigned a GLEP (http://glep.gentoo.org), but that wouldn't be real obvious to someone new to the project. That said Sergey, I'm confused because I'm still not sure what you want out of this distro. What are your reasons for looking for an alternative to Debian? ...snip... he shoots, he scores...the crowd goes wild. Let me know how I may be of service, =C= * Cal Evans * http://www.eicc.com * We take care of your IT, * So you can take care of your business. * * I think inside the sphere. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
Well said, Ben. It appears that it Debian's philosophy is only useful if 1) you really don't need to do useful work because you'll only use free stuff or 2) All your work can be done only with free tools. I believe this was illustrated some time back when Netscape was the only browser - but it wasn't free so what is a Debian to do if it's the only game in town. What does Debian do about running MS apps under Linux. Like it or not it's a requirement in many case because people can't switch cold turkey or the app is only available for Windows. Wine doesn't cut it for many apps but Crossover, VMWare, and others - all commerical - do work very well. So if a client needs an MS app but wants to run it under Linux because of the stability and reliabilty what does the Debian philosopy do - condemm him to run Windows because non of the free apps won't run what he needs and we sure can't use non-free? For most of us who have to earn a living Gentoo is the ideal fit. I have Nvidia cards in my systems and I can use them to their fullest because Gentoo has an ebuild to install the drivers - although they are "TAINTED" according to RMS. They work. Why should I be forced to use Windows just to get the most out of my hardware. Gentoo let's me run my MS app even if I use commercial software - the client is happy and so am I since I'm not having to administer and maintain Windows boxes (been there done that - got the scars ). Sergy - if you don't like Gentoo's social contract and the fact allow "non-free" software in portage please stick with Debian - you'll be happier. On Wednesday 19 November 2003 20:47, you wrote: > First off, I'll agree that the management structure document itself is > rather buried. I found it > > The philosophy link on the website makes it quite clear that Gentoo is > about "getting things done". It calls for neither the crushing of the > prolitariat nor a strict mindless adherance to the word of God Emperor > Richard M Stallman. It states (in italics even): "The most fundamental > issue is designing a technology that allows us and others to do what they > want to do, without restriction." That sounds like the definition of "free > as in freedom" to me. > > To me, Gentoo is about giving you the tools to build it your way. Gentoo > is about getting work done, the way you like getting it done. > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
> moving. Until then, I really like MFC and .NET for rapid, feature-rich > development. Thanks for the laugh Ric. I recommend to you the book 'After the Gold Rush' and do look at the project progress chapter. MFC/.Net gets you into a mess rapidly with its bloat-feature crap. I don't understand why programmers insist on code generation tools. Software is a thoughtful process. RAD is a moniker for clueless managers. Ric, the test for you is: name me three design patterns that you've used in your projects. -Sumeet > -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
Title: RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure > moving. Until then, I really like MFC and .NET for rapid, feature-rich > development. Thanks for the laugh Ric. I recommend to you the book 'After the Gold Rush' and do look at the project progress chapter. MFC/.Net gets you into a mess rapidly with its bloat-feature crap. I don't understand why programmers insist on code generation tools. Software is a thoughtful process. RAD is a moniker for clueless managers. Ric, the test for you is: name me three design patterns that you've used in your projects. -Sumeet
RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
> > Well, it is a good reason for a user (for this reason a lot of users use > MS Windows and MS Office). > A lot of users tend to ignore GNU philosophy and interpret _free_ > software as in "free beer", not as in freedom. Yep. I think that's always been true, probably because in some areas of the world, free beer has more direct meaning to their lives than some perceived freedom (ie, it's hard to know what freedom really is until you've lost it). I also don't happen to think that GNU's philosophy of "freedom" is quite the same as mine. Of course, I define freedom by my ability to actually accomplish things. That extends to my ability to write code as well and, like it or not, Microsoft has some very, very useful programming tools (expensive though they may be) and extremely rich development libraries. When Qt and Gtk become as useful (feature-rich) and as well documented, I'll consider moving. Until then, I really like MFC and .NET for rapid, feature-rich development. Ric -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 23:58:45 +0100 "Sergey V. Spiridonov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | A lot of users tend to ignore GNU philosophy and interpret _free_ | software as in "free beer", not as in freedom. If you'd like a 'religious' distribution, may I suggest Debian GNU/Hurd? -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail:ciaranm at gentoo.org Web: http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
> >> Before I decide, if I want to use a distribution, I want to know > >> something about it. Here are my questions and I need answers to draw a > >> conclusion. > > > > I'm willing to bet that most people choose a distro based on install > > ease, choice of packages, built-in tools, and so on -- NOT the > > "political" idealogy of the distro. > > How this can help *me*? It can help *you* by giving you an idea of the personal philosophies of folks who use and contribute (with support, etc) to the project. It may not be developers for the most part, but the people on this list are folks who are attracted to this project and you can get an idea of their philosophy, since that seems to be the only thing you care about in a Linux distribution, based on their answers to you. > Do you think what "most people do" is a good reason to change my > criterions? No, but just because you have different criteria than most people doesn't mean that most people should be required to answer questions for you. Especially since the Gentoo Web site has most of the answers you need if you go looking for them. At a minimum, it's pretty clear who the chief developer is. If you want to know how he feels about things and how he runs the project, go to him directly. While I seem to recall that his e-mail was a link on the Web site that doesn't seem to be there anymore, it's still quite trivial to find his e-mail address. > BTW most people use MS Windows, do you follow advices you give to other > people? Not sure what this means. I use MS Windows AND Linux (look, he's bi-lingual!) because I'm far less concerned about philosophy/politics than I am about usability and capability and there are still things Windows and Windows apps do better, more easily, etc. I have also used Solaris, HP-UX, Primos, VM/CMS, DOS, CP/M, VMS, BSD, and a handful of other operating systems. It's more about what the best (or correct) tool for the job is than it is about whether the developers believe a certain thing for me. Ric -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
I guess it's interesting to me that you require answers that are based on philosophy of the people involved in the project rather than on technical details of the project. Strikes me as a bit backwards but what do I know? I use operating systems because they do what I need them to do. Ric > -Original Message- > From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Sergey V. Spiridonov > Sent: Wednesday, November 19, 2003 3:08 PM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Barry Marler wrote: > > > This forum's name is fairly illustrative of it's purpose: to discuss > issues relating to using the distribution. > > Before I decide, if I want to use a distribution, I want to know > something about it. Here are my questions and I need answers to draw a > conclusion. > > > The Gentoo philosophy per se is, IMHO, not germane to gentoo-user. > > Then you probably know the right place for this? > -- > Best regards, Sergey Spiridonov -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
I just don't see how answers to questions of the type you have posed are of primary importance when it comes to choosing a Linux distribution. I worry more about such issues as support for the hardware on my servers, tools for the work I do (e.g., there's an ebuild for bioperl). End of discussion, AFAIC. On 21:07 Wed 19 Nov, Sergey V. Spiridonov wrote: > Barry Marler wrote: > > >This forum's name is fairly illustrative of it's purpose: to discuss > >issues relating to using the distribution. > > Before I decide, if I want to use a distribution, I want to know > something about it. Here are my questions and I need answers to draw a > conclusion. > > > The Gentoo philosophy per se is, IMHO, not germane to gentoo-user. > > Then you probably know the right place for this? > -- > Best regards, Sergey Spiridonov > > > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > -- Barry Marler Information Analyst II Center for Applied Genetic Technologies University of Georgia Athens, GA USA -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
I feel like I am talking to my wife here. > Barry Marler wrote: > > > This forum's name is fairly illustrative of it's purpose: > to discuss issues relating to using the distribution. > > Before I decide, if I want to use a distribution, I want to know > something about it. Here are my questions and I need answers > to draw a > conclusion. > > > The Gentoo philosophy per se is, IMHO, not germane to gentoo-user. > > Then you probably know the right place for this? Do you not read what I say?? Daniel Robbins is your man for this political crap. All I care about is that it doesn't destroy my system, NOT hard to deal with dependencies, but I still have the control of what I want when installing/using my applications.. I don't care about what they do, because 90% of their decisions, do not affect me much.. Example, they don't like this app so they won't support and ebuild for it?? who cares, I will create my own. (they have never done this as far as I know however) Your question your trying to get some much information for, no one really knows here.. I have told you who to go to. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
At 03:07 PM 11/19/2003, you wrote: > This forum's name is fairly illustrative of it's purpose: to discuss issues relating to using the distribution. Before I decide, if I want to use a distribution, I want to know something about it. Here are my questions and I need answers to draw a conclusion. I'm willing to bet that most people choose a distro based on install ease, choice of packages, built-in tools, and so on -- NOT the "political" idealogy of the distro. Hall -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:07:48 +0100 "Sergey V. Spiridonov" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | Before I decide, if I want to use a distribution, I want to know | something about it. Here are my questions and I need answers to draw a | conclusion. In general, people tend to use Gentoo for technical reasons rather than religious ones. The answers you're after are hard to find because this kinda thing has never really been an issue. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail:ciaranm at gentoo.org Web: http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
On Wed, 2003-11-19 at 11:50, Jeffrey Smelser wrote: > This is a political question. We know how gentoo runs, most, if not > all, can care less how developers argue about getting something in > some contract as long as gentoo runs and ebuilds come out when they > should. This is how I feel as well. I like Open Source because I can use my computer much more effectively -- and because I think the GPL is a fair deal. I'd prefer to avoid the politics if I can. I don't care. I just want quality tools to do my job, or to play with if I'm in the mood. -Luke -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 04:32:46PM +0100, Sergey Spiridonov wrote: > Thank you for answers. No problem. As opposed to some ideas that are floating here I do not care what your motives are to ask this. Every question is a valid one, and although I don't know everything I just try to reply to my best effort. The last thing I want to start is the idea that Gentoo is a "closed" distribution... > Are managers 'Gentoo Technologies Inc' employees? No. > Can managers alter the Social Contract? Everybody can propose a change to the social contract. If you mean if someone has the access to the social contract, then all people involved with the website can, but they aren't allowed to unless they have the managers' consent. > How much power Daniel Robbins have? Can he override (or veto) managers > decisions? As this is a hypothetical situation that has never occured before, I can't answer this one. And I don't think this is a valid question either, as it cannot be answered perfectly (as it is a hypothetical situation). Wkr, Sven Vermeulen -- ^__^ And Larry saw that it was Good. (oo) Sven Vermeulen (__) http://www.gentoo.org Gentoo Documentation Project pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
This forum's name is fairly illustrative of it's purpose: to discuss issues relating to using the distribution. The Gentoo philosophy per se is, IMHO, not germane to gentoo-user. On 17:40 Wed 19 Nov, Sergey Spiridonov wrote: > Jeffrey Smelser wrote: > >Sergey, > > > >Why don't you look at the home pages and talk to Daniel Robbins himself?? > > Jeffrey, > > isn't gentoo-user the place to ask questions about the Gentoo? -- Barry Marler Information Analyst II Center for Applied Genetic Technologies University of Georgia 706.583.0164 [office] 706.583.0160 [fax] http://www.plantgenome.uga.edu -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
I dont' know, frankly, but he has been on the debian weekly status.. Seems to be very active.. I didn't care to go that far. I just don't see someone who really wants these questions answered for important reasons, coming to a list of us to get it unless he has an agenda, I may not like... But I am skeptical at heart, so. > Do you mean he's part of the debian team or just a debian > user? > > On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 09:42:20 -0600 > "Jeffrey Smelser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Sergey, > > > >I am curious, your a Debian guy from my google searches. > >If your trying to "fish" for information. Why don't you > >look at the home pages and talk to Daniel Robbins > >himself?? Your fishing for information from people who > >just simply love gentoo for what it is, and don't care > >about the politics.. Your best to go to the man himself -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
This is a political question. We know how gentoo runs, most, if not all, can care less how developers argue about getting something in some contract as long as gentoo runs and ebuilds come out when they should. Again, whats so hard about asking the people you SHOULD be asking.. I am just trying to tell you your asking in the wrong place. If you want to keep asking in here and getting opinions from here, fine.. But don't go back to your debian friends with it as law, since you find it hard to ask Daniel Robbins. Frankly, I find your questions to be odd. If you really wanted to get this for some Company, or important reasons, you would be smart enough to know where to get the information you need. You, to me, seem to just be trying to get some information for some other reason.. Just my ¼ cent worth. You still have not answered MY question of why you need to know? > Jeffrey Smelser wrote: > > Sergey, > > > > Why don't you look at the home pages and talk to Daniel > Robbins himself?? > > Jeffrey, > > isn't gentoo-user the place to ask questions about the Gentoo? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
Not these kind which deal with how Gentoo operates in detail. You can go to the home page and if that doesn't satisfy you go to the people who run it - Daniel for one. We on the user list especially have only a broad overview of how Gentoo works internally - some devs have more but not much. Go to the source. On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 17:40:25 +0100 Sergey Spiridonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Jeffrey Smelser wrote: Sergey, Why don't you look at the home pages and talk to Daniel Robbins himself?? Jeffrey, isn't gentoo-user the place to ask questions about the Gentoo? -- Best regards, Sergey Spiridonov -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
Do you mean he's part of the debian team or just a debian user? On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 09:42:20 -0600 "Jeffrey Smelser" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Sergey, I am curious, your a Debian guy from my google searches. If your trying to "fish" for information. Why don't you look at the home pages and talk to Daniel Robbins himself?? Your fishing for information from people who just simply love gentoo for what it is, and don't care about the politics.. Your best to go to the man himself -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
Well, since Daniel started Gentoo and it's private I would assume that he has final say and I really can't find fault with that as he came up with Gentoo and has put a lot of time into it. As someone else asked - what's the point of all this? It sounds like you have an agenda you want to accompish. I would suggest you email Daniel directly and deal with him rather than on the list as none of us can really answer your questions. I would also suggest you take time to peruse the mail list archives as there was a big discussion on Gentoo and it's structure, goals, and aims about 6-9 months ago. Read it first before opening it all up again. On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 16:32:46 +0100 Sergey Spiridonov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Sven Vermeulen wrote: Thank you for answers. Everybody can propose to alter the Social Contract. That's all there is to it. No-one is allowed to touch the contract without being backed up by the managers decision. Are managers 'Gentoo Technologies Inc' employees? Can managers alter the Social Contract? How much power Daniel Robbins have? Can he override (or veto) managers decisions? Thanks a lot for taking time to reply. -- Best regards, Sergey Spiridonov -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
Sergey, I am curious, your a Debian guy from my google searches. If your trying to "fish" for information. Why don't you look at the home pages and talk to Daniel Robbins himself?? Your fishing for information from people who just simply love gentoo for what it is, and don't care about the politics.. Your best to go to the man himself who really sets this stuff up... Seems pretty childish to run around fishing for information to try to see how we work when you can just read the homepage and get it yourself. > Thank you for answers. > > > Everybody can propose to alter the Social Contract. That's > all there is to > > it. No-one is allowed to touch the contract without being > backed up by > > the managers decision. > > Are managers 'Gentoo Technologies Inc' employees? > Can managers alter the Social Contract? > How much power Daniel Robbins have? Can he override (or veto) > managers > decisions? > > Thanks a lot for taking time to reply. -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
On Tue, Nov 18, 2003 at 09:51:12PM +0100, Sergey V. Spiridonov wrote: > Who are Gentoo managers? Are they elected? Are they Gentoo Technologies > Inc employees? All managers are listed on http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/metastructure/projects.xml?showlevel=1. They are indeed elected by the following procedure: When there is a vacancy, all developers can propose other developers as project lead. Then all developers (including the nominees) can tell why a certain person should not be made project lead. Then the existing managers choose the new lead from the remaining nominees. This election procedure is currently a "draft" procedure. Before we took the most capable person that was interested, as previously we didn't had this much developers (nor was the management team really official). > >Everybody can propose to alter the Social Contract. > > Can Gentoo maintainers alter the Social Contract? Everybody can propose to alter the Social Contract. That's all there is to it. No-one is allowed to touch the contract without being backed up by the managers decision. Wkr, Sven Vermeulen -- ^__^ And Larry saw that it was Good. (oo) Sven Vermeulen (__) http://www.gentoo.org Gentoo Documentation Project pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: [gentoo-user] Re: Gentoo internal structure
What's with your questions?? > Sven Vermeulen wrote: > > Thank you for anwers. Here are some more. > > >>3. How key decisions are done? Is there voting system? > > > > Gentoo has several top-level projects [1]. Each project is > in charge for a > > well-defined part of the distribution. When decisions need > to be made, the > > situation is discussed at the appropriate > mailinglists/channels, after > > which the Gentoo managers (the leads of the top-level > projects) get together > > to discuss the situation and vote. > > Who are Gentoo managers? Are they elected? Are they Gentoo > Technologies > Inc employees? > > >>4. Can Gentoo maintainers correct the Social Contract? > > > > > > Everybody can propose to alter the Social Contract. > > Can Gentoo maintainers alter the Social Contract? -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
