Over the years we've had a fairly consistent stream of suggestions that we should open up the e-build maintaining process to users instead of just devs. The main arguments against it are the security issues and an expectation that it would add to developer workloads. The former is certainly a real problem, although signing (assuming a reasonable web-of-trust) could mitigate that some (at least we'd know who to blame). The latter, however, is conjecture, and the only good way to verify it would be to actually try it and see what happens. Oh, and there's also a very real fear that if things go horribly wrong, that Gentoo's reputation would suffer quite badly. Perhaps I'm naive, but I tend to think that if we were to advertise project sunrise as experimental, temporary, use-at-your-own-risk, and might-break-your-system, and even put it on hardware without a gentoo.org address and add a portage hook that warns whenever the project sunrise overlay is used, then our reputation isn't really likely to suffer even if it's a complete disaster.
So, Chris, what have I failed to address that would make this a really bad idea? -g2boojum- -- Grant Goodyear Gentoo Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76
pgpYv7ECVebb2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
