Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Gentoo's QA weakness: developers

Filed under
Gentoo

The main weakness in Gentoo’s Quality Assurance is developers not giving a shit about quality.

Let me try to explain: there are many problems with Gentoo’s QA team, like the lack of proper coordination most of the time, the lack of a real Gentoo-based effort for continuous integration testing (the tinderboxes are mostly direct pet projects of the people running them, which means for the QA standpoint Patrick and me), and the lack of an absolute rulebook of “dos ad don’ts” for what concerns ebuilds.

Of the few accepted rules, there are a few that I’m trying to enforce via the tinderbox and by opening bugs, one of these is installing documentation in the /usr/share/doc/${PF} path (where ${PF} is the full name and version of the package, including the revision number — yes I know that it would have been better to use ${CATEGORY}/${PF} but let’s not go there for now). To do so you either use the Portage-provided dodoc and dohtml helpers, or you have to tell the configure script or the install makefiles to change the directory they install their documentation into; the defaults are never right because at the worst case they don’t take the version into consideration and at the best have no idea about the Gentoo-specific revision.

It doesn’t seem like a controversial rule to enforce, does it?




More in Tux Machines

Today in Techrights

Uselessd: A Stripped Down Version Of Systemd

The boycotting of systemd has led to the creation of uselessd, a new init daemon based off systemd that tries to strip out the "unnecessary" features. Uselessd in its early stages of development is systemd reduced to being a basic init daemon process with "the superfluous stuff cut out". Among the items removed are removing of journald, libudev, udevd, and superfluous unit types. Read more

Open source is not dead

I don’t think you can compare Red Hat to other Linux distributions because we are not a distribution company. We have a business model on Enterprise Linux. But I would compare the other distributions to Fedora because it’s a community-driven distribution. The commercially-driven distribution for Red Hat which is Enterprise Linux has paid staff behind it and unlike Microsoft we have a Security Response Team. So for example, even if we have the smallest security issue, we have a guaranteed resolution pattern which nobody else can give because everybody has volunteers, which is fine. I am not saying that the volunteers are not good people, they are often the best people in the industry but they have no hard commitments to fixing certain things within certain timeframes. They will fix it when they can. Most of those people are committed and will immediately get onto it. But as a company that uses open source you have no guarantee about the resolution time. So in terms of this, it is much better using Red Hat in that sense. It’s really what our business model is designed around; to give securities and certainties to the customers who want to use open source. Read more

10 Reasons to use open source software defined networking

Software-defined networking (SDN) is emerging as one of the fastest growing segments of open source software (OSS), which in itself is now firmly entrenched in the enterprise IT world. SDN simplifies IT network configuration and management by decoupling control from the physical network infrastructure. Read more