Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The state and future of the OpenRC project

2014-06-11 Thread Rich Freeman
On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 12:17 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote: > Now git has some/all of the needed features, and people wait on a future > potential git migration instead of figuring out the important bits now > (a good part of that is defined in GLEP 63, but there's no action apart > from work on gentoo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The state and future of the OpenRC project

2014-06-10 Thread Patrick Lauer
On 06/11/2014 12:10 PM, Ryan Hill wrote: >> But, for the most part we just need to get the back-end re-written to >> work with a git repo. Actually migrating the tree itself to git is >> largely a solved problem. > > Weren't we also waiting for some gpg signing stuff to land? > That's completel

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The state and future of the OpenRC project

2014-06-09 Thread William Hubbs
All, I attempted to post an update a bit earlier, but I haven't seen it yet, so I thought I would try again. Thanks to Daniel Robbins of funtoo, I am about to getGentoo installed on another box, so I will be able to take the lead on OpenRC again. He assisted me on Skype today with getting in

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The state and future of the OpenRC project

2014-06-09 Thread heroxbd
Alexey Shvetsov writes: > However this will depend on migration of gentoo-x86 to git Well, we can start evaluating gitlab for git overlays and gentoo hosted projects, such as (back to topic :) OpenRC. Is the infra team interested in this option? pgpqPDX0LzcUz.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The state and future of the OpenRC project

2014-06-09 Thread Amadeusz Żołnowski
Rich Freeman writes: > Uh, you can't force anybody to do anything, and most of them are no > longer around. You can always encourage or ask nicely. Yes, I meant that: forcing by asking nicely. :-) > You can also set a policy of no further commits accepted without > accompanying documentation,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The state and future of the OpenRC project

2014-06-09 Thread Rich Freeman
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 4:57 AM, Amadeusz Żołnowski wrote: > > We should focus on forcing people who were involved into OpenRC to > document what they know. Uh, you can't force anybody to do anything, and most of them are no longer around. You can always encourage or ask nicely. You can also set

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The state and future of the OpenRC project

2014-06-09 Thread Amadeusz Żołnowski
Michael Palimaka writes: > Perhaps we could consider GitLab? +1 on that. I have deployed it recently at work and it seems to perform well. *Really* easy to use. Easy to deploy as well. It's written in Ruby, *not Java*. It's possible to have a basic integartion with external issue trackers.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The state and future of the OpenRC project

2014-06-08 Thread Alexander Berntsen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 08/06/14 18:38, Alexey Shvetsov wrote: >> Perhaps we could consider GitLab? > > Yep. Its better to have gitlab || gerrit || ReviewBoard Personaly > i have only expirience with gerrit > > However this will depend on migration of gentoo-x86 to git

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: The state and future of the OpenRC project

2014-06-08 Thread Alexey Shvetsov
В письме от 9 июня 2014 01:36:49 пользователь Michael Palimaka написал: > On 06/09/2014 12:41 AM, hasufell wrote: > > The amount of contributors (with real patches and real ebuilds) is > > constantly decreasing, because our workflow is horrible. I hope you > > don't actually think that bugzilla is