Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
On Friday 18 November 2005 06:15 pm, Jakub Moc wrote: > 19.11.2005, 1:38:03, Grant Goodyear wrote: > > Incidentally, the benefit is to make users who are actively helping > > Gentoo feel like they're part of the family. It was decided that a So we give them an email account?? Is there any other purpose to that? We could kill this whole debate by just sticking with the way things work right now. The average "life" of an AT (before they turn full dev) is pretty short in most cases anyway, so giving them a subdomain email just to have to move it later is yet another administrative task that nobody has time for. Let alone the confusion that has already been discussed, and the questions that remain unanswered. I am not against them having an email account if they deserve it, but if we want to give them an email account it should be an all-or-nothing (@g.o or not) thing. > Before deciding on such proposals, it might be also wise to consult infra > people who'll have to implement and maintain such things, IMHO. And, how > exactly will be people having multiple roles handled here - still missing a > clear answer... Jakub++ Nobody in infra is on board with this idea, so you will be hard pressed to find someone willing to implement it. > I'm *not* against the concept of arch testers at all, in fact I find this > idea pretty beneficial, but why do we need to complicate things and why do > we need to create third-level domain emails for that? Why not ditch the idea of yellow-starred "arch testers" and make it easy for *all* users to participate in the stability-validation of all of our packages? Make a site where users can profile their systems and "check off" the ~arch packages that work for each system on an online copy of the package repository. fex, Package X has 2,000 thumbs-up and no bugs reported, it should be safe to bump it... No email accounts needed, and users and devs alike can participate the same, whether they run just a single package ~arch or multiple full-on systems. This idea comes from a user in his blog: http://blogs.zymeta.com/roller/page/dr?entry=kde_3_4_3 (we could easily implement such a system and keep AT's around, I'm just bent on the sudden changes they are requiring to the rest of the way Gentoo works) Cheers, -Corey -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
(apologies for the messed up time in my last message) On Friday 18 November 2005 06:53 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > We've seen why this won't work in the past... Too few users know how to > do proper testing. We've had "please keyword, works for me" bugs for > things that will always segfault on startup. We've had several people > who think it'd be clever to automate testing reports. We've got enough > ricers out there that clearly broken things would end up getting "works > for me" spammed even more than they are already... Yeah, it's not a perfect solution, but nothing is. I think having users systems would be profiled may help ease the ricer issue. fex, user A has 3 systems, and marks package B as "!WFM" on one. devs can cross link that negative mark to the system profile and note that it's "-O12 --omg-itsofast", and disregard the negative mark. You could even take it a step further and setup ratings for the registered users, and those who end up with a set negativity don't count or something (for the ricers).. Not saying this is something that stability or instability should be automatically assumed from, but that it be used as another tool. Something to bridge that "poweruser" - "dev" gap. Just openly brainstorming here.. -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields pgpbSbuLtLDWa.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
On Friday 18 November 2005 07:01 pm, George Prowse wrote: > As these would be @gentoo.org <http://gentoo.org> people they would be > easier for devrel to tackle. Making them closer under the gentoo wing just > makes them easier to dicipline. No, you misunderstood... In the theoretical site I was describing, they would be users.. not @gentoo.org ppl. -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields pgpLzyzpoAxaq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
On Friday 18 November 2005 07:23 pm, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > See, it's a question of quality rather than numbers. One "it works" > report from someone who knows what they're doing is worth far more than > a thousand "it works" reports from random users. Expecting a large > number of average Joe types to produce useful testing reports is like > expecting a large number of average Joe types to produce a Wikipedia > article on how quantum cryptography works or a large number of average > Joe types to produce a Gentoo Wiki article on the design and internal > workings of versionator.eclass. Fair enough > There was a similar proposal from (?)rac a couple of years back. Might > be worth looking at why arch teams hated it last time around. will do -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields pgpBOgBo8kLYv.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
On Friday 18 November 2005 07:40 pm, George Prowse wrote: > Yeah, I think a sub-domain may not be a good solution but unfortunately it > is the best at present. The site is a good idea but nothing stops it from I disagree that it is the best idea.. Better on my list is to just not hand out email addresses if they can't be @g.o What subdomain is going to come next? @xbox360ppcport.gentoo.org? I'll join Kurt in the yellowstar domain.. -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
On Friday 18 November 2005 08:02 pm, George Prowse wrote: > Of course, by being restrictive to the people who wish to help long-term > that is the greatest benefit to gentoo. If the @g.o email addresses are a > problem then the subdomain @staff.g.o has been suggested. The staff > subdomain would contain almost all relevant other domains. If in the > unlikely event that somone proposes a subdomain to gentoo that couldn't be > considered 'staff' or 'developer' then that can be considered at a later > date. I would consider such a silly proposal as the staff.gentoo.org subdomain addresses as "unlikely", so I'm just trying to think ahead.. > In the mean time we can have a GLEP about that site you were suggesting > because that would make the ATs more efficient. Such a site is not a GLEP-worthy thing.. it does not directly affect the distribution. But that is neither here nor there. It is nothing I'm not working on anytime soon.. -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
On Friday 18 November 2005 03:46 pm, Lance Albertson wrote: > I'm very disappointed that the council did not wait on the vote for this > considering the sudden submission of the revision of the GLEP. I'm > curious the reasoning for going ahead with this? So.. I'm hearing that the GLEP was submitted, then a day before the vote it was revised.. Is that true? It should be voted on the way that it was submitted. No riders. If it needs to be revised post-submission, then such submission should be revoked. Someone should write a GLEP to propose rules to the GLEP votes. :P -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
On Friday 18 November 2005 08:31 pm, Lance Albertson wrote: > No, thats not entirely true. It was submitted a few months ago and taken > to the council where it was rejected and asked to be revised. When the > council asked for things to put on their agenda for this latest meeting, > it was asked that this GLEP be voted upon again. At this point, the > revised version had yet to be shown on -dev for discussion. It wasn't > until a day before the vote that it was sent to -dev for discussion. > > I just wanted to get the facts straight :-) (at least from how I know). Ahh, ok thanks for clearing that up. Still screwed up. Lesson learned, make friends with a majority of the council, write and propose a glep the day before a meeting and then push it through. wow. sounds a lot like American politics. -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
On Saturday 19 November 2005 08:46 am, Thierry Carrez wrote: > Grant Goodyear wrote: > > That's quite an indictment. You've skipped right past the notion that > > perhaps a mistake was made to accuse the Council of cronyism. As > > somebody who's been part of devrel, and thus the recipient of exactly > > that type of response more than once, I would think that you would have > > known (and done) better. > > +1 here. > > Cut the kabbale crap : we felt bad about delaying the GLEP vote for one > more month, and we also felt bad about pushing the decision while some > people already complained that revised version wasn't published soon > enough. The meetings logs are quite clear on this. So we took the median > way, accept that GLEP with those changes nobody complained about, and > create policy so that such things won't happen in the future. Apparently > we were wrong on two accounts : Alright, I wasn't trying to call it a cabal but if that's the way you guys see it, yeah, from the outside it looks a bit like that, considering a couple of council members I have talked to didn't have time to catch up on the changes to represent the opposing point of view. If that was a mistake as Grant pointed out, that is fine, but until Grant made that statement nobody else from the inside was considering it a mistake. Kurt's latest request attempts to rectify the mistake. -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields pgpWn1DQiagHQ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
On Saturday 19 November 2005 09:20 am, Corey Shields wrote: > couple of council members I have talked to didn't have time to catch up on I take this part back, turns out they aren't council members and I thought they were.. my bad. -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields pgpQF4PDXBkCn.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
On Saturday 19 November 2005 01:05 pm, Danny van Dyk wrote: > Corey Shields schrieb: > | Ahh, ok thanks for clearing that up. > | > | Still screwed up. Lesson learned, make friends with a majority of the > | council, write and propose a glep the day before a meeting and then > | push it > | through. wow. sounds a lot like American politics. > > Oh please Corey... Now you sound like a pissed kid. As I've said before, you guys are taking my point too offensively.. There is a problem with the council processes that needs fixed. That is all. if I really wanted to act like a pissed kid I'd be sending this email from [EMAIL PROTECTED] -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
On Saturday 19 November 2005 02:18 pm, Patrick McLean wrote: > This thread has had a disturbing amount of bickering, and there appears > to be a bit of a sentiment that arch testers don't contribute anything > more than a normal user. I have filed and commented on more bugs in the > week since I became an arch tester than I had total in the 3 years I > have been using Gentoo before that. Please don't get the wrong impression.. The bickering is not about whether ATs get to have their own repo/service to sync from, nor about whether they deserve email accounts, it is about implementation of those, and how the council is handling it. Personally, I am fine with the idea of a repo and fine with the email accounts. -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
On Saturday 19 November 2005 02:19 pm, Brian Harring wrote: > > Minor? What you're asking for will cause a lot of administrative > > nightmare for infra to manage those subdomain addresses among other > > things. > > Frankly I think you're exagerating here. What about the end-user headache of having to change subscriptions/bugzilla accounts/aliases/etc. from [EMAIL PROTECTED] to [EMAIL PROTECTED] should they turn dev? > It's a crazy notion, but y'all could've commented in the *TWO* months > that this glep has been percolating, "yo, what do you want from an > infra standpoint?". Yeah, my bad.. Had I known that infrastructure implementation decisions could be decided by a GLEP with no infra input requested, I would have paid attention. Besides, when I first read the glep "*TWO* months ago" there was nothing about email subdomains.. It was fine.. Therefore, I did not comment. > That's why you're on this ml- that is why gleps get sent to this ml- so > that all of the various groups can weigh in. Yup. And as soon as it caught my eye I weighed in.. and you're not happy with it. -shrug- Next GLEP will be how to use constructive SUBJECT lines for people who have too much email to keep up with so stuff like this will be caught sooner. > I see this mainly as infra/trustees not watching the ML. Foundation has nothing to do with this issue whatsoever. > Sucks, but too damn bad. So will be finding help from infra to implement this with that attitude. You're not helping the situation, Brian.. Kurt and Lance have spent the past few hours talking about implementing this while you blast them on the list. > I'm going to keep my mouth shut on the backdoor comment, aside from > stating that's behaviour I hope to _never_ see out of a trustee again. > ~harring Okay, you have already pinged me on IRC about this since my original correction was not good enough for you. I corrected my wrong in this thread, but I still feel that the lack of delay between the changes and the vote was not enough for devs to comment (specifically Lance). I don't care if I am a trustee or not, that's wrong. After your last email, I don't think you are in any position to comment on behaviour. ;) -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
On Saturday 19 November 2005 02:40 pm, Brian Harring wrote: > Easier, and saner to just plain drop the subdomain notion. Avoids the > whole gentoo personel first class/second class issue first of all, > second avoids infra aliasing annoyances. I agree with this. -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Email subdomain
On Saturday 19 November 2005 04:09 pm, Brian Harring wrote: > Subdomain complaints, fine, I'm not even going to argue that one at > this point, the actual cvs enabling, you should've known it was > coming- being surprised by it sucks, but so does trying to revert it > because it surprised you. there is a big misunderstanding here.. Nobody is disputing access to the tree. We all knew about that from the original GLEP. -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] implementation details for GLEP 41
On Saturday 19 November 2005 08:25 pm, Grant Goodyear wrote: > In any event, do we need a new server anyway? We actually do have some > money that could be spent on such things, and the CVS server is really > high on the list of for which I, personally, would be more than willing > to spend it. > > -g2boojum- This is a good possibility.. I personally don't use cvs that much but have heard from quite a few people that it could be faster. And the box that it is currently on does not have any OOB management. We've talked about OSL getting a couple of new boxes for Gentoo, one for a new dev.gentoo.org and one for cvs, but it's looking like just the one for dev will be a reality. I will be ordering it next week. That said, we can roll in an order for an additional box and get a good price on it. The problem in all of this is the money transfer. I'll check on Monday if there is a possible way to go from Gentoo Paypal to OSL Foundation. We can whip out a proposal if that works out. (there are other ways of doing it, yes, but this would be cheapest I know of right now) -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] implementation details for GLEP 41
On Saturday 19 November 2005 08:50 pm, Lance Albertson wrote: > Yeah, we defiantly could use a beefy new server for CVS/SVN. Just make > sure you chat with robbat2/Pylon on the specifics for the requirements. > I believe the main thing they wanted was lots of ram. As discussed before, the new dev will be a dual xeon 3.0/1M, 2GB ram, 6x146GB U320 scsi. adding more ram to this setup wouldn't be a problem. I'll cc them and ask how much ram hits the sweet spot and get a new quote this week. -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: implementation details for GLEP 41
On Sunday 20 November 2005 06:49 am, Lares Moreau wrote: > On Sun, 2005-11-20 at 04:29 -0700, Duncan wrote: > > If the capacity is there, go RAID6 (dual parity RAID5, so two drives can > > drop out without the thing dieing) with a hot-spare as well, so > > threex146GB usable. > > Is RAID6 production ready? If you are running HP equipment they have been doing it for years, calling it RAID ADG (advanced data guarding iirc). I've setup all of my servers as RAID ADG plus a hot spare to compensate for their disk failure rate. -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] opinion on how to improve the website redesign
On Monday 21 November 2005 01:07 pm, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > I thought that Daniel was taking the red bubble letters. I also > remember the discussion about the infinity logo way back then and the > decision was made to keep it. For one, it is very easy to print, I thought that the vote was for a website redesign, not a logo redesign. I agree that the infinity sign should go. No other "Gentoo" text on that page has the sign, so it looks out of place and inconsistent to have it in one spot. -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields pgplyFKPEMo1O.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for January
On Wednesday 04 January 2006 21:39, Alec Warner wrote: > I think some people have attempted things that are interesting or > innovative, although they may not have gotten off of the ground quite > yet. I think for instance, that Stuart's webapp-config project is a > good idea, and while I also think his first attempt sucked, that perhaps > in the future it could be a great tool, especially for large virtual > host places. I think it sucks that he has gotten the flack from it here. > > The Gentoo Installer is an interesting project, not only for the > graphical frontend, but for the Distro-sponsored Network installer that > is being worked on. I think many distributions lack tools in this area > and we can be interesting and helpful here. > > The Portage project has some cool stuff coming up. I realize that the > 2.X codebase scares a lot of people away due to it's nature but recently > there has been a lot more active development in features and planning. > Plus there is code in the savior branch to do some "interesting" things :) Bingo. Bingo. Bingo. Where is the centralized vision that everyone is working together here that people not directly related to each project will buy in to and therefore do what they can to see it succeed? Where is the collaboration between groups to make it happen? I think this has already been hashed out enough, but your points can be drawn back to that. Portage team is running in one direction, webapps another, GLI a third direction (while kicking anyone who wishes to run with them in the nuts). In any structured environment I have worked in, you have a heirarchy where everyone, down to the grunts, know where they are heading as an organization, why they are heading that way, and what they can do to help. Even though groups work on differing things, they know how those things are directly affecting the end goal (mission statement, whatever) Right now, Gentoo has it's cliques that come up with their own things, and to get assistance from another clique you're gonna have to have some ties or work real hard to sell your idea to them. It's too flat of a model to work for any real innovation, else, as Kurt pointed out, we would have seen some cool stuff in the past couple of years. > If this Gentoo project fails/falters (like you seem to think it is > heading) you are free to do the same, form your own project with it's > own set of rules and leader if you so choose. Gentoo won't fail.. I don't believe that is what Kurt or Lance are saying. I think the point was that Gentoo is not moving at the typical pace of OSS development, and we believe that it is the organizational structure that is holding it back. > Partially I ( as currently still a user at this point ) would like to > see a bit more project management. I see that webapps posted a monthly > meeting reminder to -dev, but how many projects really have meetings > that often? Do they accomplish anything? Should we have someone that > tries to attend most meetings to make sure things are going smoothly, or > going at all? Do we need to have slacking projects that get killed off > by the council as well as "slacker" council members? Thanks for your comments.. As for management, anyone who reads "Five Dysfunctions of a Team" by Patrick Lencioni[1] will see all of the problems that Gentoo has, as well as the potential Gentoo has if it worked well. Cheers, -C [1] - http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0787960756/104-9660666-9133512?v=glance&n=283155 -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy on RESTRICT=[no]mirror and use of mirror://foo/
On Thursday 05 May 2005 02:04 pm, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Unless there is something I've missed, why do we have ebuilds with > RESTRICT=nomirror, having a GPL-2 license, and distributed via > sourceforge? Wouldn't RESTRICT=primaryuri be much better? Most fetches > would go to SF first, and we'd still have a copy available on our > mirrors. At one point in time someone suggested that we may as well utilize other people's mirror networks that are already out there, rather than our own. This then got implemented for stuff like sourceforge packages. Unfortunately this plays hell for lots of people. If you have a local mirror, then you get files fast and without using your outside bandwidth. Having to wait for a file from some mirror in zimbabwe because "that package already has a mirror structure" defeats the purpose of running a local mirror. On top of that, if you have a private network (RFC 1918) with a gentoo mirror on the inside, you can't reach the SRC_URI on restrict=nomirror packages, and they don't end up on the mirror anyway. We had this problem on dozens of servers at IU.. At one point in time even gentoo-sources was marked nomirror, since kernel.org had their own network. I think that nomirror should be used as seldom as possible. Licensing issues are legit. We've had one case where mirror admins complained about a file that was too big (a 2 gig neverwinter nights file), but otherwise I have talked with them before about releasing "nomirror" wherever we can, and they didn't mind. If someone wants to put the "Official" stamp on the licensing/nomirror policy, that would be great. Just as important, I think we need to backtrack and clear out that restriction wherever it is unnecessarily used. Cheers, -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team and Devrel Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Policy on RESTRICT=[no]mirror and use of mirror://foo/
On Thursday 05 May 2005 03:06 pm, Lance Albertson wrote: > We could make a couple of bugs for each category and get those folks to > fixing them. But then that would require a lot of work and I know we're all > just a bunch of lazy bums anyways ;) I smell a new dev requirement.. "Fix 10 nomirror'ed ebuilds, then report to your mentor" ;) -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team and Devrel Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields pgpX5djK7iz6t.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Will Gentoo be at Linux World Expo San Fran?
As long as we are invited to be in the .org pavilion, yes. Also in the works are plans for a day-long gentoo conference before or after LWE (probably after, the Friday of that week would be a good fit). Cheers, -Corey James Dio wrote: CORRECTION: quite tired really... I meant during AUGUST not the end of this month.. sorry On Sun, 2005-05-08 at 19:06 -0400, James Dio wrote: Will Gentoo be at Linux World expo in San Fransisco the end of this month? -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Gentoo Conference - Call for ideas
Greetings! We have secured a location and date for a Gentoo developer conference to correspond with the timing of LWE in San Francisco. The date will be Friday, August 12th. Global Netoptex (netoptex.com), one of Gentoo's infrastructure sponsors, has offered space in their facility to host the conference. This is only 5 blocks from the Moscone center, making it convenient for people who will be in town for LWE that week. Once available, seating and registration will be limited to the space we have, but we are also working on the possibility of webcasting the sessions. The question I have is what kind of content would you like to see? This may turn into a call for participation later, but right now we are trying to get a feel for what topics people would be interested in hearing and talking about. Thanks for your input, -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team and Devrel Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields pgpokfxFn6SYc.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Conference - Call for ideas
On Tuesday 24 May 2005 10:25 am, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > * Improving the desktop "experience" -- how, what, when? You gonna be there to do this one? ;) Thanks for the input! -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team and Devrel Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields pgpiRs7DW7rHe.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] where goes Gentoo?
On Mon, 2005-06-06 at 19:55 -0400, Aron Griffis wrote: > In my humble opinion, Gentoo is missing too many points to be an > enterprise Linux. We commit to a live tree. We don't have true QA, > testing or tinderbox. We don't have paid staff, alpha/beta/rc cycles. > We don't really have product lifecycles, since we don't generally > backport fixes to older versions, requiring instead for people to > update to a more recent release. We don't have, and probably will > never be able to offer, support contracts. We support as wide a range > of hardware as the upstream kernel, plus hardware that requires > external drivers; we don't have access to a great deal of the hardware > for which we provide drivers. We understand when real life gets in > the way of bug-fixing, because all our developers are volunteers. I don't feel that the list of requirements you have for "enterprise" linux is necessarily what the enterprise needs.. I think Gentoo has some steps that can be taken to be a better enterprise player, but to come out and state that it won't work is a bit bold. It might not work for HP's description of "enterprise", but that doesn't mean it wouldn't work for someone else. I have talked with people who have used Gentoo in HPC clusters with great success, and I would consider that an enterprise arena. > I think that attempting to take Gentoo in the "enterprise" direction > is a mistake. I think that we are a hobbyist distribution. This > doesn't mean that we should not strive to meet some of the enterprise > goals. Those things can be important to hobbyists too. But I don't > think we should be aiming for corporate America. Wow... as a sysadmin who has run Gentoo in some very high profile production systems that's a bit offensive to think I used it outside of a hobbyist platform.. IBM didn't just donate a $30k system for ppc64 development to make it better for someone's basement use, so I don't think I'm alone in thinking that Gentoo is above "hobbyist". > I don't even understand why that goal appeals to people. Let other > distros go there! I want Gentoo to run in people's homes, in student > dorm rooms, etc. Places where people want a fun distribution that > they can tailor and work on easily. Let other distros go there at $1500/year/node (RHEL AS)... Gentoo is already a fun distribution.. I don't think that has to change to meet enterprise goals. > If RH or SuSE (or another for-profit Linux vendor) wants to take some > of those developments and use them to make a profit, that's fine with > me. We're over here having fun. Personally, I was drawn to Gentoo by the community, which was a lot of fun. I still have fun working with the people in this community. I don't see why an enterprise goal should be equated with losing the fun aspect of Gentoo. Cheers, -Corey -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] where goes Gentoo?
On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 11:08 -0400, Aron Griffis wrote: > Ah, sorry, that isn't quite what I meant. Rather I intended to point > out that we should not be deluded into thinking that the changes > required for Gentoo to be enterprise-ready are small. Some of the > changes are surmountable, but each one could appear to necessitate, > IMHO, a change at the core of Gentoo development. I would prefer for > the solutions to be possible more transparently. Yeah, the changes that do need to be made are not small I agree. I do feel that for the most part they could be made without disrupting the core of Gentoo. For example, there is no need to put a freeze on the whole tree in the name of "enterprise stability" and screw everyone else wanting bleeding edge packages, when you could snapshot the tree (like you mention below) > For example, one way a company could presently deploy Gentoo > In other words, a company can implement a Gentoo product lifecycle > as a wrapper around the existing Gentoo development process. It is > a lot of work for the company, and they'd better hire some bright > sysadmins, but it would be possible. > > If there is an enterprise subproject formed in Gentoo, I'd like to see > their methods be similar. Develop tools that make it easier to manage > and maintain an enterprise deployment, without changing how Gentoo is > currently developed. Without hoisting new expectations on the Gentoo > developers, release process, etc. GLEP 19 is pretty much right along these lines, and already has some prototype/testing going on. :) > I did not intend "hobbyist" to be disparaging. I think that the big > companies (including HP, who has also donated tens of thousands of > dollars of equipment btw) see a lot of potential in Gentoo. Cool. I probably put too much personal feeling behind it. I don't trust corporate distros anymore. I was in a situation where we got royally screwed by RedHat, tried to work out a deal with them, and had no luck. For us we got stuck in the whole "first one is free, then you're hooked" game. I'm not against paying for support and services (I think rhn is the coolest thing since sliced bread, and worth some money), however, I do not think that their prices are reasonable, especially when they ask you to switch from free to paying six digits in the middle of a fiscal year where you haven't budgeted for it. So, my desires for Gentoo to fit better in the enterprise stem from not wanting to stick with a corporate distro.. Kinda selfish, I know. :) > Great! I think we are closer in our perspectives than it seems. :) Cheers, -Corey -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] where goes Gentoo?
On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 18:38 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > ...and you *still* haven't gotten an ia64 livecd built? For shame! He's getting close.. Just got some more hardware put into dolphin last week, and it has a spindle of blanks sitting right on top of it. so umm, yeah, that's a start:) -C -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] a #g-d first impression might represent process and metastructure
Sorry you had a bad experience. Please do not let the words and actions of one developer reflect on the hundreds of others. On Wednesday 08 June 2005 04:23 pm, Jim Northrup wrote: > 1) There is nowhere specified on gentoo.org or gentoo maintained sites > I've rtfm'd specifying any hint of conduct guidelines for being a > developer interfacing with the outside world, representing the > organization. Common social ettiquette does not always reside with > skilled techies... We specifically talk about irc in the etiquette policy: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=3&chap=2 > 2) There are gentoo.org references to #gentoo-dev, but the process of > interfacing, mentoring, and recruiting are self-referential beginning > with a bootstrap of being on the good side of an existing developer. So > for those of us who do not establish favorable dialogues by filing a > bug, the door starts out closed. It's a good idea to have everything bugged just for the sake of getting things accomplished. IRC is nice, and a lot of collaboration goes on there, but a lot of things fall through the cracks. If there seems to be a lot of push to interface through bugzilla, the reasons are to be able to track stuff and get it done. I hate bugzilla as much as the next guy, but I think it helps to prevent a lot of frustration from requests getting lost. Cheers, -Corey -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team and Devrel Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields pgpjx9pL204dG.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Gentoo Conference, August 12th in San Francisco
Greetings! We're doing a developer conference the Friday after LWE. It should be a cool event, with plenty of meet-and-greet. Unfortunately we're limited to 30 seats, but Indiana University has stepped up to offer webcasting of the event (with archived video for those who can't catch it live) so this should be good for everyone. See http://devconference.gentoo.org for details and to register. No need to register for the webcast, registration is just if you intend to be there in person. It is $10 to register. You get lunch and a t-shirt out of it, too. Cheers, -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team and Devrel Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields pgpybI54xHdY5.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] LWE Exhibit badges courtesy of Gentoo
If you happen to be registering for an "Exhibit Hall" badge for the upcoming LinuxWorld Expo in San Francisco, use priority code N0339 to let them know that you're coming to support Gentoo! The badges are free if registering in advance, and $35 at the door. However, if you use this code the door fee is waived. (or hunt me down during that week for an exhibit hall pass) We should have a nice booth this year. Thanks to dostrow, we will have "Powered by Gentoo Linux" stickers to hand out, along with a couple of demos (an x86 and a pegasosppc demo). Looking forward to meeting many of you there! Cheers! -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields pgpEB6ALeNopL.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Gentoo conference webcast today
Greetings! In a couple of hours our post-LWE conference will begin. This event will be webcast (if all goes well). Indiana University has capacity for a few hundred live viewers, so tune in and check it out! See http://devconference.gentoo.org/ for more info, and join us in #gentoo-devconference Cheers, -Corey -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo conference webcast today
On Friday 12 August 2005 5:15 pm, Michael Marineau wrote: > > See http://devconference.gentoo.org/ for more info, and join us in > > #gentoo-devconference > > So is there an archive of the webcast anywhere for those of us who were > busy during the day? The live links seem to be dead now :-( I'll be posting the archive urls when I get back from LWE. Cheers, -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Devconference archives
Archive links for the complete morning and afternoon sessions are at http://devconference.gentoo.org With IU's media servers we can make links that start at the times of each individual presentation, but I'll probably get to those later as they need to be timed and I lack the motivation right now. Thanks to the speakers of the conference, to Global Netoptex for hosting the conference, and to Indiana University for providing the streaming servers and bandwidth. -Corey PS - For those who are emailing me about using the Real Media codec. Yes, I realize it is a "proprietary" format, but it is one that we as a distribution support, so if you wish to protest the webcast it is your loss. When I sent a call for help with this conference, IU offered their services. Nobody else did, and despite that nobody else could handle the capacity that they could. If it is offensive to people to do it in real, we will skip the webcasting next time. -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
[gentoo-dev] LWE pics
If anyone has any pictures of the Gentoo booth from LWE last week, please send them my way. Thanks! -Corey -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields pgpTwlsfGGicJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council meeting, Thursday 15th, 1900 UTC
On Tuesday 13 September 2005 5:22 pm, Lance Albertson wrote: > I would like there to be a clause that infra has the ability to at least > temporarily revoke access to have the ability to protect our servers if > something came up quickly. I've always made sure any permanent removals > go through devrel first. that's always been policy, but yeah wouldn't hurt to put it in print somewhere.. -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Getting Important Updates To Users
On Monday 31 October 2005 09:17 am, Lance Albertson wrote: > Implementing --news will take time. Implementing more news on our site > now takes little work and can be easily done. Outside of these two > options, what is better? I'd say a constant reminder in the GWN would be > helpful. Maybe we could add a big news warning in the next minor portage > update that when you tells you about the new news features (perhaps a > big einfo after you upgrade. > > I know thats not the best solution either, but I dont' foresee --news > becoming a reality for a while. I disagree that beefing up website news will get the word out. The people who complain to me personally about major changes that they did not know about are the type of people who are not checking this sort of thing anyway. The last time I remember paying attention to the website news myself was to double check a post that I had made.. long ago. Something like --news is bound to reach every admin and sounds like the best way to go. Adding more news to the site is just going to push news that really matters off the front page quicker and cause possible problems with more and more people committing broken xml news items. What are going to be the criteria for posting such a news item? We could have 20+ posts a day just saying "Version bump, w00t!". As for the earlier comment on this thread: "Yes it will, because when a new users visits the front page for the first time to install Gentoo, they will see the important notices there and put a note in the back of their heads about it." (Chris White) What are you going to do to inform the people upgrading their system that they installed 3 years ago? Sure, they may have read the front page when they installed it. Are they going to want to have to read a web site on -every- upgrade? no. -C -- Corey Shields Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Team Gentoo Foundation Board of Trustees http://www.gentoo.org/~cshields pgprK1xy5CWcT.pgp Description: PGP signature
