-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Henrik Brix Andersen wrote:
> To my former fellow Gentoo developers and users,
>
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 11:58:09PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
>> To my fellow Gentoo developers and users,
>>
>> In last weeks council meeting [1] it was decided th
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Thomas Cort wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 22:19:14 -0400
> Luis Francisco Araujo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> The users explicitly compromise to (just to make it clear): [1,2,3,4]
>
> People who participate in open projects like Gentoo come and go.
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 22:19:14 -0400
Luis Francisco Araujo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The users explicitly compromise to (just to make it clear): [1,2,3,4]
People who participate in open projects like Gentoo come and go. What
happens if/when the proxy maintainer decides to leave? Who will take
ca
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hello everyone,
Here, with this email, i propose (after a brief discussion on irc with
gensteaf)an alternative or at least a new model to address a few issues
with our maintainers needs and the inclusion of new packages into the
tree. Probably an alte
To my former fellow Gentoo developers and users,
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 11:58:09PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
> To my fellow Gentoo developers and users,
>
> In last weeks council meeting [1] it was decided that the Sunrise project is
> no longer suspended. I can give a short overview of the
Stephen P. Becker wrote:
> Eso since when did we have the discussion where you actually
> addressed all of the numerous concerns brought forth right before this
> project was initially suspended?
Do you have any concrete concerns that have not been dealt with yet? I would
like to hear abou
Stefan Schweizer wrote:
In last weeks council meeting [1] it was decided that the Sunrise project is
no longer suspended. I can give a short overview of the current status of
the overlay:
- we currently have 154 ebuilds in 58 categories in the overlay
not counting the ebuilds that got into por
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi everybody,
The Gentoo vmware team have been developing new ebuilds for
vmware-workstation, vmware-player and vmware-server (and
vmware-server-console), to help ease the maintenance of the shared
modules and shared patches between these products. S
To my fellow Gentoo developers and users,
Sunrise is about contributing ebuilds and getting feedback and review while
doing so. The main resource this currently happens for is the Gentoo User
Overlay of Sunrise and second come ebuilds that get into portage afterwards
In last weeks council meeting
(I subscribed to -dev only a while ago so I can use only this message
to reply. So take this as more general reply. I used quotes from other
mails also. Hopefully it is not too confusing.)
On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 11:11:33 -0700 Richard Fish <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 7/27/06, Chris Gianelloni <
On 7/27/06, Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Honestly, they shouldn't be stable. In fact, likely, many shouldn't be
in the tree. We have way too many packages that are used solely by a
small group of people sitting around the tree. These would be better
served in official overlays,
Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Thu,
27 Jul 2006 10:25:52 -0400:
> Since the introduction of the x86 architecture team, we have had a
> significant slowdown in the "stabilization" of packages in the tree.
> However, we have also gotten numerous e
* Steve Dibb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> That's actually how I read the first email, was that it's really the
> majority of the _minor_ packages that get completely neglected, and
> just sits in the tree for months or years marked unstable because
> nobody cares.
then the users probably
* Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schrieb:
> > 1) thousands of packages will never be marked stable
>
> Honestly, they shouldn't be stable.
hmm, maybe we should have different groups of ports (*1) for
a) quite stable: no bugs yet and enough votes)
b) *proven* to be stable: has passed
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
I'd say no bugs, 30 days, passes internal tests, being run by users =>
stablise, for the majority of packages (obviously, there may be some
exceptions...).
Luckily, you're not making the call. ;]
The "majority" of packages are also the ones that need more extensiv
The sys-apps/hwdata package isn't marked stable on any architecture. It
is the upstream Red Hat version of the package, and was the last version
that would work successfully with "hwsetup" as we use on the releases.
Since this won't be getting any updates from upstream (as they've moved
onto an in
On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 12:19 +, Duncan wrote:
> "Chris Bainbridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
> [EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
> below, on Thu, 27 Jul 2006 10:00:39 +0100:
>
> > The testing is supposed to be for the ebuild, not the package itself,
> > so there's not much point in holding back pa
On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 10:34 +0100, Roy Bamford wrote:
> Maybe this semi-automatic stabilisation by default could be adopted by
> the tree cleaners project?
I propose that we remove the name "project" from any "team" that really
consists of only one or two people. I think part of the problem is
On Thu, 2006-07-27 at 10:00 +0100, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
> I would also like to see that (though maybe with some automated
> feedback from users systems as to which packages are installed / how
> often they are run). All that the current process ensures is that:
Any automated system will cause s
On Wed, 2006-07-05 at 18:28 +0200, Alexandre Buisse wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 5, 2006 at 18:20:08 +0200, Patrick McLean wrote:
>
> > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > I would like to nominate:
> > vapier/SpanKY
> > flameeyes
> > Kugelfang
> > uberlord
> > wolf31o2
> > seemant
"Chris Bainbridge" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted
below, on Thu, 27 Jul 2006 10:00:39 +0100:
> The testing is supposed to be for the ebuild, not the package itself,
> so there's not much point in holding back packages with simple ebuilds
> from being stabilised.
While ~a
On Wed, 26 Jul 2006 10:04:11 +0200
Martin Schlemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Anyhow, that is the whole issue with mozilla stuff in general - huge
> hunk of code that is not really modular, and have to be rebuild for a
> few to many projects. While I am all for getting the POS more modular
> (
On 2006.07.27 10:00, Chris Bainbridge wrote:
On 27/07/06, Stefan Schweizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
As a better system I would like to see packages stable automatically
after 30 days and no bugs. But this is probably not going to happen
with gentoo so I just stay away from stable
On 27/07/06, Bartlomiej Szymczak <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi.
I've noticed Mozilla Foundation has a list of "good first bugs". Very
useful when trying to get more developers.
Could you list 2-3 "good first bugs" so that I could look at them and
see if I can handle them?
You are the best jud
On 27/07/06, Stefan Schweizer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The problem is in the system. Unless you are a developer _and_ part of the
arch team you cannot do anything but file a bug and wait and wait and wait
until a member of the arch team decides to test the package again for his
own and mark it
Richard Fish wrote:
> On 7/2/06, Daniel Ahlberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> This is an automatically created email message.
>> http://gentoo.tamperd.net/stable has just been updated with 15968
>> ebuilds.
>
> A question [1] has come up on -user about why some ebuilds take so
> long to
Hi.
I've noticed Mozilla Foundation has a list of "good first bugs". Very
useful when trying to get more developers.
Could you list 2-3 "good first bugs" so that I could look at them and
see if I can handle them?
In my opinion a good "good first bug" should have the following characteristics:
27 matches
Mail list logo
