Mailing List Archive

Proposal for IRC channel/ user forum
antarus posted recently to the user reps forum asking for feedback on how to
solve user experience glitches like the recent xmms removal. (I do *not*
want to discuss that thanks ;) The thread is at:
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-516142.html

richfish came up with the simplest solution to the problem of old ebuilds:
> The best possible case I can think of for most of these ebuilds is to push
> them upstream assuming upstream is alive and willing to maintain them
> (possibly with some user-supplied patches now and then). Users would then
> be responsible for installing the ebuilds to their local overlays, and
> filing bugs with upstream if something doesn't work. In fact, my strong
> preference in this is to just tell users to use their local overlay
> regardless of whether upstream accepts ownership of the ebuilds. I would
> even suggest we encourage this by providing a dedicated forum and IRC
> channel for users to help each other with their 'private' ebuilds.
>
This requires a new IRC channel and forum (one suggestion was `sunset' 8) so
I thought I'd post in here to see what everyone thought.


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: Proposal for IRC channel/ user forum [ In reply to ]
I don't think that officially supported ebuilds that are officially
unsupported is a good idea. If they were officially supported then
they would in effect never be removed, just simply placed somewhere
else. It seems to me that this should be a third party project if
anything.

On 12/19/06, Steve Long <slong@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> wrote:
> antarus posted recently to the user reps forum asking for feedback on how to
> solve user experience glitches like the recent xmms removal. (I do *not*
> want to discuss that thanks ;) The thread is at:
> http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-516142.html
>
> richfish came up with the simplest solution to the problem of old ebuilds:
> > The best possible case I can think of for most of these ebuilds is to push
> > them upstream assuming upstream is alive and willing to maintain them
> > (possibly with some user-supplied patches now and then). Users would then
> > be responsible for installing the ebuilds to their local overlays, and
> > filing bugs with upstream if something doesn't work. In fact, my strong
> > preference in this is to just tell users to use their local overlay
> > regardless of whether upstream accepts ownership of the ebuilds. I would
> > even suggest we encourage this by providing a dedicated forum and IRC
> > channel for users to help each other with their 'private' ebuilds.
> >
> This requires a new IRC channel and forum (one suggestion was `sunset' 8) so
> I thought I'd post in here to see what everyone thought.
>
>
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: Proposal for IRC channel/ user forum [ In reply to ]
Dan Meltzer wrote:
> I don't think that officially supported ebuilds that are officially
> unsupported is a good idea. If they were officially supported then
> they would in effect never be removed, just simply placed somewhere
> else. It seems to me that this should be a third party project if
> anything.
>
Of course they're being placed somewhere else, just not in the live tree.

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list