On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 4:10 AM, Pacho Ramos <pa...@gentoo.org> wrote: > El mié, 14-08-2013 a las 23:53 +0800, Patrick Lauer escribió: > [...] >> Well, it should reflect reality. >> >> PMS is still broken as much as it does not reflect the state of portage >> before PMS was written, and we've had to patch it up a few times to make >> it coherent, plus it is still lacking half the things that would make it >> useful as a standard. >> >> Your academic interpretation of standard as a platonic ideal >> disconnected from reality serves no purpose. >> > > On this topic I agree with Patrick: I don't fully understand why things > (like in_iuse from eutils.eclass) are missing from PMS. If that applies > to more features that were forgotten when writing PMS, we have a > problem :(
Just picking a random spot to reply in this mess, but it could apply to many other posts. If somebody proposes a change and the PMS team is holding it up for an inappropriate reason, escalate it - don't stew over it and blow up on the mailing lists twice a year. However, from what I've seen in the past most "problems with PMS" are like most "problems with Gentoo" - they're things that people wish were different but which nobody bothers to fix. Nobody is getting paid to make PMS better, just as nobody is being paid to work on the dozen security GLEPs that came up 47 posts ago. When things don't happen in Gentoo 9 times out of 10 it is because nobody has put in the time to make them happen. In the 1 time out of 10 where some kind of bickering actually holds things up, that is the time to bring issues to the project lead or to the Council to get resolved. I won't speak for anybody but from my observations in the past in most cases where somebody rushes to defend portage against the evil forces of PMS we have a 75 post flamewar and then one of the portage maintainers steps up and basically explains that there is nothing wrong and things with PMS are going fine. I'm all for the Council being more proactive, but that doesn't mean asking infra to BCC us on every email sent through gentoo so that we can find and act on every one-off issue that two devs have a disagreement on. If there is a problem bring it up. We call for agenda items every month, and we already agreed that if issues are more critical that we would act on them in-between meetings if appropriate (just file a bug and/or ping the alias). However, if your request is going to be that we scrap PMS, honestly, I wouldn't waste your (and our) time - mine is only one vote but frankly I don't see it happening. By all means complain if the PMS team unfairly rejects a proposal, or make suggestions as to ways to improve how PMS is run. However, your suggested improvements need to come along with people willing to implement them. You can't just say "I wish this team that I have no interest in helping out worked differently" unless you can persuade them to go along with it. Oh, and as far as devrel leads treating people like children go - my sense is that most devs would like to see devrel taking a more active lead in dealing with nonsense on the lists, not less. If things get out of hand they can be dealt with, but frankly the main thing that seems to be out of hand here are personal attacks on the list. After that huge thread on -core a few months ago I think that we need to have more direct intervention when inappropriate behavior on the lists takes place - otherwise we just have an atmosphere where everybody feels like they have PTS. A wrist slap on the lists is better than rage-quit or bans. Rich
