View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
asturm Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007 Posts: 9317
|
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2021 4:30 pm Post subject: Dantrell's GNOME Without Systemd Project (Part 4) |
|
|
Dantrell's GNOME Without Systemd Project (Part 4)
I think it is time to drop the "Without Systemd" part from the title as it could mislead users into thinking they would need to add the overlay for that purpose. But this has not been special for quite some time. I'll leave it up to you if it is still worth the sticky, but in my opinion what remains is an overly fork happy repository with GNOME versions often ahead of Gentoo repository. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GDH-gentoo Veteran
Joined: 20 Jul 2019 Posts: 1734 Location: South America
|
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2021 4:42 pm Post subject: Re: Dantrell's GNOME Without Systemd Project (Part 4) |
|
|
asturm wrote: | I think it is time to drop the "Without Systemd" part from the title [...] | But that is part of the project's name. Which is justified, since for quite some time it was indeed the only way to install GNOME without systemd.
asturm wrote: | [...] as it could mislead users into thinking they would need to add the overlay for that purpose. But this has not been special for quite some time. | I think that the first post in that thread is clear enough about that. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
asturm Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007 Posts: 9317
|
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2021 4:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It is well enough identifyable by the name of its maintainer. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
GDH-gentoo Veteran
Joined: 20 Jul 2019 Posts: 1734 Location: South America
|
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2021 5:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I could probably say "that software package from Freedesktop.org that does authorization" instead of "Polkit", "that fork of systemd-logind originally developed for GNU Guix" instead of "elogind", or "that KDE component that implements a window manager and compositor" instead of "KWin", and maybe people would understand what I mean, but the fact remains that "Polkit", "elogind" and "KWin" are those projects' names... |
|
Back to top |
|
|
asturm Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007 Posts: 9317
|
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2021 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The thread title is not here to promote a "brand" but a purpose. The purpose at this point would rather be described as "Dantrell's overlay of many GNOME versions" which arguably would do a better job to address the target audience. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
dantrell l33t
Joined: 01 Jun 2007 Posts: 915 Location: Earth
|
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2021 5:24 pm Post subject: Re: Dantrell's GNOME Without Systemd Project (Part 4) |
|
|
asturm wrote: | I think it is time to drop the "Without Systemd" part from the title [...] |
The forum thread topic follows the project name.
I'm not going to rename the project because you say it's not good optics.
asturm wrote: | [...] it could mislead users into thinking they would need to add the overlay for that purpose. |
In the first line of both Dantrell's GNOME Without Systemd Project (Part 3) and Dantrell's GNOME Without Systemd Project (Part 4) I have made it quite obvious that there is official support and where it can be found.
That you disagree that I did enough is your own problem.
asturm wrote: | I'll leave it up to you if it is still worth the sticky, but in my opinion what remains is an overly fork happy repository with GNOME versions often ahead of Gentoo repository. |
The project supports multiple GNOME release versions.
If packages are not forked to ensure things continue to build for all supported GNOME release versions then Gentoo itself would need to be forked.
That you disagree with the project supporting multiple GNOME release versions is your own problem.
asturm wrote: | But this has not been special for quite some time. |
This is nothing special about this project.
There was never anything special about this project.
It is, after all, a personal hobby project (of which there are many) that utiziles overlays (which by their very nature encourage forking).
Yet, for some reason over the years, instead of pretending it doesn't exist you have been quite vocal in your personal vendetta against it.
That you can't let matters rest is also your own problem.
P.S. This response was less for you and instead more for the record. I won't be following up. _________________ Dantrell B. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
asturm Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007 Posts: 9317
|
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2021 5:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Dantrell, that you can't respond in a normal way is your own problem.
I don't care about GNOME, how you spend your free time, or how you call your project.
I do care about users in the forums and bugzilla seeking support, which providing to those using dantrell-gnome I haven't stopped completely yet, something I would have to reconsider were I to start pretending it doesn't exist. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Hu Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2007 Posts: 22771
|
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2021 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Although I don't use GNOME, I have generally followed dantrell's support thread, mainly to make sure it doesn't pick up off-topic posts that distract from its use as a support thread. Along the way, I ended up reading some of dantrell's responses to users. As I understand it, the forking done in the project is because that was the least bad way of implementing the changes that dantrell felt were necessary for proper operation. I grant that the name may confuse new users, but for a long time, the name's implicit claim that this was the only way to use modern GNOME without systemd was, as far as I know, accurate. It may no longer be accurate to imply that this is the sole way to get GNOME without systemd, but the project is recognized under its historical name. If dantrell wants to rename the project, that is his choice, and if he does so, I'm happy to do what I can with stickies, thread renames, etc. to help users find the new name. If he chooses not to rename the project, I think keeping the existing forum thread title is preferable. I'm not inclined to push him to one choice or the other without clear evidence that keeping the name is a problem. I've had to move relatively few GNOME-without-systemd posts due to people putting them in the wrong place, and I cannot recall any of those where the user was confused about what they were getting. Instead, they were mistaken in the belief that posting in P&P was the right venue for a system which had numerous packages from dantrell's overlay. By standing policy, P&P is usually not the right venue for a system which has notable influence from any overlay. Dantrell's project is not singled out in this regard. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
asturm Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007 Posts: 9317
|
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2021 7:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hu wrote: | I've had to move relatively few GNOME-without-systemd posts due to people putting them in the wrong place, and I cannot recall any of those where the user was confused about what they were getting. |
You seem to consider only obvious cases where the question is unmistakenly overlay related. I am considering slot conflicts/emerge blockers where dantrell-gnome is part (and cause) of the impasse. Realistically, most users will have one or a number of overlays listed in `emerge --info` output but they aren't (and shouldn't be) immediately moved to Unsupported Software. That requires at least a minimum capacity for collaboration. The overlay maintainer seems to be of a different opinion, if I understood correctly. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Anon-E-moose Watchman
Joined: 23 May 2008 Posts: 6170 Location: Dallas area
|
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2021 8:24 pm Post subject: Re: Dantrell's GNOME Without Systemd Project (Part 4) |
|
|
dantrell wrote: | That you disagree that I did enough is your own problem. |
*two thumbs up*
Quote: | Yet, for some reason over the years, instead of pretending it doesn't exist you have been quite vocal in your personal vendetta against it.
That you can't let matters rest is also your own problem. |
Interesting pattern of behavior. _________________ UM780, 6.1 zen kernel, gcc 13, profile 17.0 (custom bare multilib), openrc, wayland |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Hu Administrator
Joined: 06 Mar 2007 Posts: 22771
|
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2021 9:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
asturm wrote: | Hu wrote: | I've had to move relatively few GNOME-without-systemd posts due to people putting them in the wrong place, and I cannot recall any of those where the user was confused about what they were getting. |
You seem to consider only obvious cases where the question is unmistakenly overlay related. I am considering slot conflicts/emerge blockers where dantrell-gnome is part (and cause) of the impasse. Realistically, most users will have one or a number of overlays listed in `emerge --info` output but they aren't (and shouldn't be) immediately moved to Unsupported Software. That requires at least a minimum capacity for collaboration. The overlay maintainer seems to be of a different opinion, if I understood correctly. | I don't categorically move things to Unsupported just because an overlay is in emerge --info. My understanding of dantrell's preference is that he wants GNOME-without-systemd questions merged into his support thread, rather than handling them as separate threads. Personally, I wouldn't run the support thread that way, but he's the one providing support, and it doesn't hurt anything to run it the way he is, so I defer to him on how he wants to run it. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
asturm Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007 Posts: 9317
|
Posted: Fri Mar 05, 2021 9:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hu wrote: | I don't categorically move things to Unsupported just because an overlay is in emerge --info. My understanding of dantrell's preference is that he wants GNOME-without-systemd questions merged into his support thread, rather than handling them as separate threads. |
What do you consider a GNOME-without-systemd question then? Should we routinely merge threads about emerge blockers into dantrell's support thread as soon as their overlay is involved in the conflicts? Elleni would not have gotten support in P&P in that case only very recently.
Hu wrote: | As I understand it, the forking done in the project is because that was the least bad way of implementing the changes that dantrell felt were necessary for proper operation. |
I have no doubt that is necessary to some extent, but I am also aware of at least one case where personal preference, not technical necessity of a fork lead to a conflict bug report. But ultimately, that's just an aside; the only thing I cared about when starting this thread was the outdated thread title. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
asturm Developer
Joined: 05 Apr 2007 Posts: 9317
|
Posted: Sat Apr 03, 2021 11:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
asturm wrote: | Hu wrote: | I don't categorically move things to Unsupported just because an overlay is in emerge --info. My understanding of dantrell's preference is that he wants GNOME-without-systemd questions merged into his support thread, rather than handling them as separate threads. |
What do you consider a GNOME-without-systemd question then? Should we routinely merge threads about emerge blockers into dantrell's support thread as soon as their overlay is involved in the conflicts? Elleni would not have gotten support in P&P in that case only very recently. |
Case in point: https://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-1133049.html |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|