[RFC] Call for new team leader
jeremy at jutley.org
Wed Nov 10 01:50:39 PST 2004
Jamie Bennett wrote:
>Jeremy Huntwork wrote on 09 November 2004 18:55
>>On Sun, 2004-11-07 at 19:08 -0700, Kevin P. Fleming wrote:
>>>For a variety of personal reasons (primarily due to the new business I
>>>started a few months ago), I am stepping down as the team leader of the
>>Well, since I haven't seen any response to this yet, I figured I might
>>as well offer myself for the job. :) I'm willing to get more invovled.
>I think a clear idea of where the project is going should be the first
>priority of any would-be ALFS leader. Are we going to stay in maintenance
>mode and just do bug fixes or is nALFS2 going to materialise? Obviously if
>nALFS2 is in the pipe works then we need to attract coders but from our
>last initial enthusiasm for nALFS2 showed, when it came to the coding
>people went quiet.
I definately have ideas for the future of nALFS, however, I'm the first
to admit, I'm NOT a coder at all. IMO, the future of nALFS should be
dependency tracking within the profiles, logging of files installed by
packages, and a client/server architecture, where a "nalfsd" could run
on a central server, and any clients could get profiles one piece at a
time from that server.
>IMO another one of ALFS's biggest downfalls is, surprisingly the LFS
>community itself. ALFS and more specifically nALFS should, IMO, be the
>common tool used by _ALL_ LFS members who are testing LFS builds. It should
>go hand in hand with other tools such as svn as a requirement. It would
>make comparing builds from various people a whole lot easier if we used the
>same tool and the same profile.
Jamie, I must respectfully disagree here. You are enthusiastic about
nALFS, and that's a good thing. But, trying to force it onto others is
wrong. I personally didn't like to use nALFS, but I've come around,
however, if I'm testing things out, I still prefer to be "hands on" and
build everything by hand. That way, you can watch what's happening with
the build much easier. The thing is, a build should be identical if the
same commands are performed, no matter if someone has built by hand, or
by nALFS, and some people *DO* prefer to use their own favorite methods
of automation (bash scripts, makefiles, whatever the case may be).
nALFS is just another tool in the toolbox of the LFSer.
But, people are starting to see the advantages to nALFS - Jeremy
Huntwork is helping with the profiles, and put nALFS on his bootcd.
Matthew is starting to play with it himself, I've started to use it.
>Lastly (honest!), I'd like to see auto-generation of the ALFS profiles from
>the book ala lfscmd. This could be done with XSLT or some other tool.
Then, all I can say is, do it! If you can find a method of turning the
book's XML into an ALFS profile automatically, without user interaction,
I'm all ears. Personally, I don't think that can be done right now
without more massive changes to the XML structure of LFS itself.
>I'm willing to get more involved as my work commitments have gone the
>opposite way of Kevins and I actually have more time now :)
Glad to hear it. Now, we just need some strong leadership to get the
ALFS project back moving forward again!
More information about the alfs-discuss