[转载]what gentoo needs
Guanqun
Guanqun 通过 Google 阅读器发送给您的内容：
If Gentoo wants to remain one of the prominent distributions in this world I believe some things need to change. Gentoo is, in my opinion, starting to become crusty. I mean all distributions have their issues but I don’t use every distribution just Gentoo so I can’t comment on everyone.
- A new website - Gentoo’s website is terribly outdated. While fairly functional it looks terrible. The layout could definitely use some updating. What should it look like? I’m not sure but there are a lot of websites out there that I feel have much more attractive, yet still functional, designs.
Good Examples:Bad Examples:
- More active development - I have no gripe with 90% of our current development team. In fact many of them do a good job. But the sad truth of it is many of them don’t appear to be doing such a wonderful job. The whole fiasco with Daniel Robbins a while back is only one point to look at. Another good example is the Release Team. Its December 2007 and we’re still rocking 2007.0. Where’s .1 or .2? If we want to stay on top of the game we’re going to need to release more often than once a year. Period.
- Package Manger War - Gentoo needs to end the package manager war. Having three viable package managers has its ups but it has a lot of downs too. Mainly its confusing to new and current users. Not to mention it looks bad to the rest of the Linux community. While most people would claim we should not care what they think, I believe their attitude is going to affect the minds of those searching for a distribution. And not in a good way. Most importantly, this is the kind of war that causes distributions to fork. Forking is not generally a good thing and with inevitably lead to at least one dead distribution. Or an eventual re-merger. Beryl is a good example of this.Things can be done to fix this though. Or at least get the ball rolling in the right direction. The package manager specification needs to be completed and certified. In my personal opinion portage should be dumped all the way around. Even taking up pkgcore instead of paludis as the official PM would, in my opinion, be a step toward the right direction. Though I would prefer paludis personally; portage is starting to show its age either way and needs to go. The back end needs considerable updating as well. Its no secret the ebuild used by Gentoo has its flaws. Replacing it with something more robust while fixing up the tree would be beneficial to say the least.
I want to make it clear, though, that I don’t advocate rushing the specification through the process just to have one. This is one thing we need to take our time with but on the same hand we can’t slack off with.
Those are the three biggest issues I see. Comments, good and bad, welcome. I do censor foul language though…
Enjoy the Penguins!
可从此处完成的操作：
- 使用 Google 阅读器订阅Planet Larry
- 开始使用 Google 阅读器，轻松地与您喜爱的所有网站保持同步更新
Zhang Le
> 其中说到gentoo的网站比较陈旧，看来ZhangLe在本地化我们自己的网站的时候还是有先见之明的啊。:-)
我说过什么？看来我发的东西太多了，有的自己都不太记得，呵呵。
--
Zhang Le, Robert
http://r0bertz.blogspot.com
http://zh.gentoo-wiki.com
http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/pgubook
http://groups.google.com/group/gentoo-china
http://groups.google.com/group/szlug
Guanqun Lu
> On Dec 5, 2007 10:00 PM, Guanqun <Guanq...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 其中说到gentoo的网站比较陈旧，看来ZhangLe在本地化我们自己的网站的时候还是有先见之明的啊。:-)
> 我说过什么？看来我发的东西太多了，有的自己都不太记得，呵呵。
...好像说我们网站的风格不必拘泥于主站的风格。
>
> --
> Zhang Le, Robert
> http://r0bertz.blogspot.com
> http://zh.gentoo-wiki.com
> http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/pgubook
> http://groups.google.com/group/gentoo-china
> http://groups.google.com/group/szlug
>
--
Guanqun
Zhang Le
> On Dec 6, 2007 12:45 AM, Zhang Le <robert....@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Dec 5, 2007 10:00 PM, Guanqun <Guanq...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 其中说到gentoo的网站比较陈旧，看来ZhangLe在本地化我们自己的网站的时候还是有先见之明的啊。:-)
> > 我说过什么？看来我发的东西太多了，有的自己都不太记得，呵呵。
>
> ...好像说我们网站的风格不必拘泥于主站的风格。
其实我是想弄个wiki形式的
gentoo的网站结构是上一代的了，统一发布，统一修编
不过那样的话，我们就要自己摸索了
最主要的是怎么和gorg整合
