On Fri, 2023-04-28 at 08:59 +0200, Florian Schmaus wrote: > On 27/04/2023 14.54, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Thu, 2023-04-27 at 09:58 +0200, Florian Schmaus wrote: > > > Disk space is cheap. > > > > No, it's not. Gentoo supports more hardware than your average PC with > > beefy hard drive and/or possibility of installing one. Let's not forget > > that you need a ::gentoo checkout even on a system running purely > > on binary packages. > > You are right. Gentoo supports a broad range of hardware in many > dimensions, e.g., architecture, release date, and composition. > > You seem to suggest that are Gentoo systems that can not handle the > additional disk space consumption of EGO_SUM Go-packages? > > I can not imagine systems that are able to deal with the ~500 MiB > ::gentoo repository, but would break if the same repository would > contain 100 additional Go-packages with 200 KiB each. > > Even under a "worst-case" assumption, where we would have 256 > Go-packages with each having a 1 MiB package-directory size, any system > that can handle the current state of ::gentoo should be able to take the > additional 256 MiB (+ metadata).
That's the slippery slope of exponential growth. If every developer thought "oh, worst case it'll grow only 10%"... There's roughly 19k packages in Gentoo. Go packages constitute only a small number of them, yet maintainers of these packages seem to assume it's fine if they take up a significant portion of disk space. That's not fair at all. In fact, I'm pretty sure I ground some numbers in the previous thread. > > > I am only pursuing the modest request to legitimize any decision > regarding EGO_SUM by a democratic vote. > > As far as I can tell, there was never a democratic vote regarding > EGO_SUM. But please correct me if I am wrong. Since when are eclass design issues "legitimized" by "a democratic vote"? In the best case, they are handled via rough consensus. In the worst, a single person can't stand a decision and bothers everyone until they let them have their way. Open source is not a democracy, it's volunteer effort. People dedicate their free time and do their best. If you want something done, you have to either do it yourself (and do it right!) or convince someone to do it. You don't overturn maintainers by "democratic votes", that's actually how you shatter open source community and make volunteers stop contributing. Believe me, I've made enough bad decisions to know that now. > And I never said that I believe in representing the majority's opinion. > That said, I prefer to have this voted on by an all-developer vote than > a council vote. Then we would know what the majority voted for. Is that > possible? There's the General Resolution but it's supposed to be used only to override Council decisions, so you should go with a Council vote first. I don't believe this is a hill worth dying on but if you insist... *shrug*. I just wish you'd actually listen to people and put some real effort to reach a compromise/consensus rather than pushing your narrow solution through with no regard for consequences. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
