Roy Marples <roy@marples.name> posted
1198537244.2806.13.camel@uberpc.marples.name, excerpted below, on Mon, 24
Dec 2007 23:00:44 +0000:
> On Mon, 2007-12-24 at 21:39 +0000, Duncan wrote:
>> Apparently, at present, pretty much the only one with access is the one
>> who actually did the port, and he's hasn't done much with it since.
>
> I beg to differ - I've down an awful lot with the code.
I guess I was a bit ambiguous as I had mentioned your project in passing,
but that remark as quoted was intended to apply to the Gentoo PMS repo,
not your RC project (which I know has seen progress as I've been
following the blog).
Sorry for the confusion.
> Granted I'm waiting on Gentoo Infra to host it (the git repo) because
> that is what we agreed. However I'm probably going to end up going with
> someone else, or hosting myself, because it's now coming up to 2 months
> and nothings ready yet.
... So the remark, while intended for the Gentoo PMS repo, would seem to
apply to the Gentoo repo for your project as well... Not to be hard on
infra here, just reality, which must be dealt with.
> Heck, my retirement bug [1] is still pending and
> I currently have full access to all my accounts on various boxes. So
> either I'm a very trustable guy that you really don't want to retire
> (tough, I have) or some people are slacking.
From all the discussion I've seen, you /are/ trusted. The arrangement
they are working on for you is the first of its kind (probably one reason
it's taking the time it is), and I don't think something they'd have
considered for just anyone. (If you note, the PMS repo thing, which they
are treating similar, is documentation, not code, certainly not code that
has been and will continue to be at the core of very close to every
Gentoo box out there.)
> [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=199318
I expect that's showing in the "lack of haste" in closing the retirement
bug as well. You are still trusted and your code will continue to be at
the center of Gentoo for the foreseeable future, so regardless of dev
access or not you could still screw Gentoo over if that was your intent,
and given that, well, there are just more pressing matters to attend to.
That said, while flattered, I'd be bugged about it too if it were me. I
know I'm sermonizing the choir here but crackers love stale but still
active accounts, and it remains your name on the line, so yeah, there's
reason for concern.
--
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
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
1198537244.2806.13.camel@uberpc.marples.name, excerpted below, on Mon, 24
Dec 2007 23:00:44 +0000:
> On Mon, 2007-12-24 at 21:39 +0000, Duncan wrote:
>> Apparently, at present, pretty much the only one with access is the one
>> who actually did the port, and he's hasn't done much with it since.
>
> I beg to differ - I've down an awful lot with the code.
I guess I was a bit ambiguous as I had mentioned your project in passing,
but that remark as quoted was intended to apply to the Gentoo PMS repo,
not your RC project (which I know has seen progress as I've been
following the blog).
Sorry for the confusion.
> Granted I'm waiting on Gentoo Infra to host it (the git repo) because
> that is what we agreed. However I'm probably going to end up going with
> someone else, or hosting myself, because it's now coming up to 2 months
> and nothings ready yet.
... So the remark, while intended for the Gentoo PMS repo, would seem to
apply to the Gentoo repo for your project as well... Not to be hard on
infra here, just reality, which must be dealt with.
> Heck, my retirement bug [1] is still pending and
> I currently have full access to all my accounts on various boxes. So
> either I'm a very trustable guy that you really don't want to retire
> (tough, I have) or some people are slacking.
From all the discussion I've seen, you /are/ trusted. The arrangement
they are working on for you is the first of its kind (probably one reason
it's taking the time it is), and I don't think something they'd have
considered for just anyone. (If you note, the PMS repo thing, which they
are treating similar, is documentation, not code, certainly not code that
has been and will continue to be at the core of very close to every
Gentoo box out there.)
> [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=199318
I expect that's showing in the "lack of haste" in closing the retirement
bug as well. You are still trusted and your code will continue to be at
the center of Gentoo for the foreseeable future, so regardless of dev
access or not you could still screw Gentoo over if that was your intent,
and given that, well, there are just more pressing matters to attend to.
That said, while flattered, I'd be bugged about it too if it were me. I
know I'm sermonizing the choir here but crackers love stale but still
active accounts, and it remains your name on the line, so yeah, there's
reason for concern.
--
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
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list