Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] Let's make Source Mage not suck!

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Juuso Alasuutari <iuso AT sourcemage.org>
  • To: SM-Discuss <sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Let's make Source Mage not suck!
  • Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 08:41:15 +0000

On Friday 05 January 2007 06:04, Andrew wrote:
<snip>
> Heres the list of basesystem spells:
>
> basesystem bash binutils bison bzip2 console-tools console-data coreutils
> cpio dialog diffutils e2fsprogs file findutils flex gawk gcc gettext glibc
> gnupg grep grub gzip iana-etc init.d installwatch less lilo locale kbd
> m4 make mktemp module-init-tools nano ncurses netconf net-tools patch
> perl procps readline sed shadow simpleinit-msb smgl-archspecs smgl-fhs
> tar texinfo udev unzip util-linux wget zlib
>
> I included both possibilities for bootloaders and console-tools and also
> added udev. If someone wants to double check it, that'd be great.
>
> I'd like to take "tor" and "gdb" as my spells. I like and use both of them
> (I also wrote one of the two initial tor spells, which were merged into
> the current one). If people want, I can suggest spells for them, rather
> than leaving it open-ended (this addresses that some people want more
> specific direction). I'll take some of the more sorcery-oriented
> basesystem spells too, I really should be more involved with them anyways.
>
> Maybe a good subsequent step would be to start a wiki page with a table
> containing the list of spells, for each spell the volunteer for this
> cycle, and if they have "signed-off" yet.
>
> "Signing-off" just means that you affirm you've fixed any "gating" bugs w/
> the spell and are thus comfortable letting the spell go to stable. A
> gating bug is any bug we're not comfortable releasing to stable. I would
> say any regressions (the spell fails when it didnt before) are gating. Old
> obscure bugs would not be gating, the definition of old and obscure has
> to be case-by-case I would imagine. Just to clarify, this is only
> inclusive of spells on our list. There can be regressions or whatever
> in spells not on the list, we're ignoring those for the time being.
>
> I think having a wiki is useful because people can add spells to
> the list themselves, rather than everyone posting here and one person
> collecting them. Plus, its clear to anyone, anytime, what work is left
> to do, and what spells were actually inspected/supported for a
> given release.
>
> For subsequent cycles we'd copy the table and clear the signed-off flags,
> add a few new spells. Then branch test and start fixing/signing-off on
> things again.
>
> Does this sound reasonable? Assuming no major objections I'll start the
> wiki tomorrow, that is, unless someone beats me to it.

I think this is a good idea. And I'll volunteer right away to work with udev
(the huge default rules file needs to finally be split into optionals). I
have past experience of it, and especially now that vlaaad is gone it needs
an active maintainer.

I'll grab netconf too while I'm at it; it still has the DEVICE_MAC option
which was deprecated when udev introduced their own persistent interface
rules.

By the way, do you think a Roadmap to 0.9.7 wiki would help focus our
efforts?
I could start it after you write the spell list wiki.

--
Juuso Alasuutari
[[ Source Mage GNU/Linux ]]

Attachment: pgpjYj1pLIGxR.pgp
Description: PGP signature




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page