Re: Gentoo Linux into the future
Kurt Lieber <[email protected]> Fri, 27 Jun 2003 07:57:57 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.linux.gentoo.sysadmin |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--01b0+GAtiOmVD9T6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jun 26, 2003 at 04:14:28AM -0700 or thereabouts, Zack Gilburd wrote: > AFAIK, klieber is against the idea of gentoo-server becoming too high on = the=20 > agenda. I don't see why we wouldn't need carpaski just to implement the= =20 > above emerge -p stuff, alone. I'm not against it, per se, but at least so far, I haven't seen enough of a distinction wrt the gentoo-server project to understand how it would warrant a top level slot. I do, however, fully support the idea of a gentoo-server project of some kind -- be it its own project or a sub-project of gentoo-alt. (or whatever) I'm happy to act as a Gentoo representative for the project, at least to the rest of the management team, but I need you guys to figure out what you want out of this project. Not just goals and ideas, but actionable items on how those ideas can be implemented. Zack mentioned an idea about portage having a "stability" rating. I haven't really thought it through very long, but it seems like such a rating could be generated out of our gentoo-stable project. Either way, *those* are the types of things that we, as a group, need to come up with. My time is limited right now for obvious reasons, so I'm going to leave much of this discussion to you guys. I encourage you not only to discuss things amongst each other on this list, but also poll people on the other mailing lists, the forums, etc. Also, be sure to keep things reasonable. Requests to re-write portage from scratch and stick everything into a mysql database are less likely to gain traction quickly than simply asking for a stability rating. Decide how important something is vs. how long it is likely to take to implement. --kurt --01b0+GAtiOmVD9T6 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+/DFAJPpRNiftIEYRAluAAJ4hJ0JjRtamFZ8m7QYv6J8ZmwDl0gCghRo1 fNJPgPmv1kkOlPtIRStzQDo= =kv6+ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --01b0+GAtiOmVD9T6--