On Thu, November 8, 2007 10:12, Paul Mattal wrote:
Aaron Griffin wrote:
ArchLinux Status Report, 2007-11-05 =================================== Aaron Griffin (Reviewed by Travis Willard)
So, some of you may have noticed there was no Status Report last week. Well, see, I got busy. No one to blame but myself. I _was_ going to get it out on Tuesday, but decided to "roll with it", as it were.
So, before we get started, I wanted to get some honest opinions - does doing this every 2 weeks make you guys feel less pestered?
After reading Getting Things Done, I actually operate a lot on the week cycle, so I prefer a week. That said, it probably takes you a substantial amount of time to put these together, so I'll take whatever you're willing to do.
I find these immensely helpful at keeping items moving. Just in rereading this list in the process of responding, I put two more things on my list to do.
* The dividing line: extra and community
Another discussion that has gone by the wayside. I'll try to summarize here to see if we can a better idea.
The question: when does a package belong in extra?
We all agree that we need some sort of "rule" for this. There seems to be two big ideas on how to "answer" this question:
a) Split extra into "mantle" and "crust". Mantle contains packages "important to the distro" to be agreed upon by the developers, and crust contains anything else a developer wants to maintain.
b) The idea above remains the same, BUT extra is not split at all. The "mantle" packages go to extra, and "crust" packages go to community.
So, what do you guys think? Should we vote on these two to get things moving?
I vote for a), because:
1) I don't think we should make decisions for the TU community. They operate quite well relatively self-sufficiently, and I don't think devs should start putting packages in [community] if they aren't part of that community.
2) It will encourage us to make a choice to commit to some packages as a distro. This is a good thing. I still don't know what packages are okay to put in [extra] and which are not, and I'd like to have a repo I can put any package in that I'm willing to stake my reputation on ([crust]) and later see it voted into fuller support ([mantle]) if there's consensus.
I kinda agree. I don't think we need to make any change though. I think the split works well as it is... from my point of view: [extra] - we provide a higher level of 'support' and are typically more important packages than those in [community]. (gnome, soffice, openbox.. more popular things). More support as we have [testing], more integrated developer group, priority on bug tracker, more attention etc. [community] - lesser level of support. _Typically_ less popular/important/more niche (niche packages, special interest, slightly less popular) Exceptions are allowed, as some developers will maintain some "personal" packages in [extra] that may be "better" in [community], as this is more convenient for them. Consider it a perk of being a developer. James