FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-23-2009, 06:26 AM
Donnie Berkholz
 
Default Gentoo Council Reminder for February 26

This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
irc.freenode.net) !

If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even vote
on, let us know! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole Gentoo dev
list to see.

Keep in mind that every GLEP *re*submission to the council for review
must first be sent to the gentoo-dev mailing list 7 days (minimum)
before being submitted as an agenda item which itself occurs 7 days
before the meeting. Simply put, the gentoo-dev mailing list must be
notified at least 14 days before the meeting itself.

For more info on the Gentoo Council, feel free to browse our homepage:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/

--
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Developer, Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com
 
Old 02-24-2009, 04:47 PM
Brian Harring
 
Default Gentoo Council Reminder for February 26

On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:26:48PM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
> Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
> irc.freenode.net) !

Informal request, but it would be useful to get an idea of the
councils views on portage overlay compatibility issues.

Specifically, when it comes to gentoo repositories, there is one, and
only one definition of what that is- pms's repo spec. The problem
here is that the only repository truly conformant to that spec is
gentoo-x86, for the rest of the repositories (overlays realistically)
whatever portage supports seems to be the eventual standard they grow
towards.

Problem with this is that there is *zero* way to spot these non-pms
repositories as it stands. Simplest example, under portage overlays
can unmask pkgs globally (gnome overlay reverting masks in
gentoo-x86), package.unmask exists/works, package.keywords
exists/works, and package.mask can be a directory.

I've not traced through the mess of config's __init__ to verify
*every* pms noncompliance there, but I'd assume there are definitely a
couple more hanging around to blow up in alt managers faces.

At the very least I'm after having the non-pms repos marked in some
fashion so that alt implementations don't have to assume the portage
standard (rather then the *agreed to* pms standard) to avoid
exploding, but that's a rather short sighted solution- something is
needed long term.

Either way, I'd be curious about the councils *informal* opinion on
the overlay issue.

thanks,
~harring
 
Old 02-24-2009, 05:01 PM
"Santiago M. Mola"
 
Default Gentoo Council Reminder for February 26

On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 6:47 PM, Brian Harring <ferringb@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> At the very least I'm after having the non-pms repos marked in some
> fashion so that alt implementations don't have to assume the portage
> standard (rather then the *agreed to* pms standard) to avoid
> exploding, but that's a rather short sighted solution- something is
> needed long term.
>

And/or make Portage noisy on PMS violations.

Regards,
--
Santiago M. Mola
Jabber ID: cooldwind@gmail.com
 
Old 02-25-2009, 06:12 AM
Donnie Berkholz
 
Default Gentoo Council Reminder for February 26

On 23:26 Sun 22 Feb , Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
> Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
> irc.freenode.net) !
>
> If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even vote
> on, let us know! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole Gentoo dev
> list to see.

Here's the preliminary agenda. I'm running a bit behind on -dev, so it's
a little out of date re GLEPs 54/55. People including lu_zero, cardoe,
dev-zero, and tanderson should fill us in on things below that they've
taken responsibility for. Anyone else can chime in anywhere!


Open council spot
-----------------

leio is next on the list. He's willing to join the council. A few of us
already voted to confirm him on-list, and we're waiting on the others.

Goal: Vote to confirm him, if necessary.


GLEP 55 / bash version
----------------------

Crazy amounts of discussion on-list. Cardoe & Tiziano, you took
responsibility for this -- can you sum up the current state of things?
Pending something better, here's what I'd like to see happen on-list (or
on the wiki, whatever) before the meeting:

Goal: Come up with 3 things:
1) Agreement that this is a problem we need to solve now;
2) Come up with a list of potential implementations;
3) Come up with pros & cons for each.

At that point, we should have enough information to at least rank them
and decide out whether the top-ranked one has the right approach. We
should then clearly define any problems with it and suggest
improvements.


GLEP 54: handling code from SCMs better
---------------------------------------

Some discussion on list. Luca, can you sum up the state of things?


PMS compliance in Gentoo-hosted trees besides gentoo-x86
--------------------------------------------------------

ferringb requested this. We need some discussion on-list before we talk
about it during a meeting, so please chip in and reply to his post.


Suggestions are welcome, as are any summaries from our new secretary. =)

--
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Developer, Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com
 
Old 02-25-2009, 10:06 AM
Petteri Räty
 
Default Gentoo Council Reminder for February 26

Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 23:26 Sun 22 Feb , Donnie Berkholz wrote:
>> This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
>> Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
>> irc.freenode.net) !
>>
>> If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even vote
>> on, let us know! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole Gentoo dev
>> list to see.
>
> Here's the preliminary agenda. I'm running a bit behind on -dev, so it's
> a little out of date re GLEPs 54/55. People including lu_zero, cardoe,
> dev-zero, and tanderson should fill us in on things below that they've
> taken responsibility for. Anyone else can chime in anywhere!
>
>
> Open council spot
> -----------------
>
> leio is next on the list. He's willing to join the council. A few of us
> already voted to confirm him on-list, and we're waiting on the others.
>
> Goal: Vote to confirm him, if necessary.
>

There already were enough votes (4/6 I think) to confirm him.

Regards,
Petteri
 
Old 02-25-2009, 11:42 AM
Gilles Dartiguelongue
 
Default Gentoo Council Reminder for February 26

Le mardi 24 février 2009 à 09:47 -0800, Brian Harring a écrit :
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:26:48PM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
> > Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
> > irc.freenode.net) !
>
> Informal request, but it would be useful to get an idea of the
> councils views on portage overlay compatibility issues.
>
> Specifically, when it comes to gentoo repositories, there is one, and
> only one definition of what that is- pms's repo spec. The problem
> here is that the only repository truly conformant to that spec is
> gentoo-x86, for the rest of the repositories (overlays realistically)
> whatever portage supports seems to be the eventual standard they grow
> towards.
>
> Problem with this is that there is *zero* way to spot these non-pms
> repositories as it stands. Simplest example, under portage overlays
> can unmask pkgs globally (gnome overlay reverting masks in
> gentoo-x86),

I reply here as part of the gnome herd and partly responsible for the
mask reverting in the overlay. I didn't know something used in
gentoo-x86 couldn't be used in an overlay. Could you point me to the
PMS section that treat this ?

--
Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@gentoo.org>
Gentoo
 
Old 02-25-2009, 11:56 AM
Brian Harring
 
Default Gentoo Council Reminder for February 26

On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 01:42:38PM +0100, Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote:
> Le mardi 24 février 2009 à 09:47 -0800, Brian Harring a écrit :
> > On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:26:48PM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> > > This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
> > > Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
> > > irc.freenode.net) !
> >
> > Informal request, but it would be useful to get an idea of the
> > councils views on portage overlay compatibility issues.
> >
> > Specifically, when it comes to gentoo repositories, there is one, and
> > only one definition of what that is- pms's repo spec. The problem
> > here is that the only repository truly conformant to that spec is
> > gentoo-x86, for the rest of the repositories (overlays realistically)
> > whatever portage supports seems to be the eventual standard they grow
> > towards.
> >
> > Problem with this is that there is *zero* way to spot these non-pms
> > repositories as it stands. Simplest example, under portage overlays
> > can unmask pkgs globally (gnome overlay reverting masks in
> > gentoo-x86),
>
> I reply here as part of the gnome herd and partly responsible for the
> mask reverting in the overlay. I didn't know something used in
> gentoo-x86 couldn't be used in an overlay.

Suspect I wasn't clear; you *can* use things from the parent (although
that whole relationship is outside of PMS); the problem here is that
y'all are reverting something in the *master*.

Literally, bug-buddy was masked in gentoo-x86; enabling your overlay
reverts that masking in *gentoo-x86*. Only reason this even works is
due to portage internals being limited (everything is stacked
together, no true standalones possible).

> Could you point me to the PMS section that treat this ?
Flip through the package.mask section (snagging from profiles.tex
directly)-

"""
Note that the {-spec} syntax can be used to remove a mask in a
parent profile, but not necessarily a global mask (from
{profiles/package.mask}, section~
ef{profiles-package.mask}).


ote Portage currently treats {profiles/package.mask} as being on
the leftmost branch of the inherit tree when it comes to {-lines}.
This behaviour may not be relied upon.
"""

Note the 'parent profile'. Why they're claiming repo level masking
can't be reversed for that repo, not sure (reasonably sure several
profiles rely on it). Either way, your overlay is trying to revert
entries it doesn't have in that stack.

Only reason it flies for portage is because it collapses it all into
one stack; for managers designed to support multiple standalone repos
that assumption no longer applies, thus that behaviour (outside of
PMS) breaks.

~harring
 
Old 02-25-2009, 01:22 PM
Nirbheek Chauhan
 
Default Gentoo Council Reminder for February 26

On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 12:56 PM, Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@gentoo.org> wrote:
> This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th
> Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @
> irc.freenode.net) !
>
> If you have something you'd wish for us to chat about, maybe even vote
> on, let us know! Simply reply to this e-mail for the whole Gentoo dev
> list to see.
>

This is an informal request for a peaceful compromise on a problem of
utmost importance which has the potential to turn into a massive
flame-war. Specifically, I'm referring to bug #256614. The latest
actions of a recently-recruited 'nirbheek' (belonging to the GNOME
herd) on the bug seem to leave the matter in a dicey situation.

Needless to say, this matter shadows all other topics on the council's
list, and must be resolved ASAP to dampen the inevitable clash of
titans. Perhaps the council meeting should be pre-poned to avert an
explosion of flaming posts the likes of which haven't been seen this
year... yet.

Humbly prostrating,

~Nirbheek_who_has_too_many_alter_egos Chauhan

--
Resident silly guy and troll
 
Old 02-26-2009, 06:02 PM
Luca Barbato
 
Default Gentoo Council Reminder for February 26

Donnie Berkholz wrote:

Some discussion on list. Luca, can you sum up the state of things?


http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_81c676b7338c7c0dd10ce13b0e4684a2.xml

and

http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_22ecf185ab30a470fa7c26c06633d495.xml

Pretty much give you a summary, nothing much had been said probably
because glep-54 has impact to a lesser number of people and thus is less
interesting than the all encompassing glep-55.


lu

--

Luca Barbato
Gentoo Council Member
Gentoo/linux Gentoo/PPC
http://dev.gentoo.org/~lu_zero
 
Old 02-26-2009, 06:19 PM
Donnie Berkholz
 
Default Gentoo Council Reminder for February 26

On 23:12 Tue 24 Feb , Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> Here's the preliminary agenda. I'm running a bit behind on -dev, so
> it's a little out of date re GLEPs 54/55. People including lu_zero,
> cardoe, dev-zero, and tanderson should fill us in on things below that
> they've taken responsibility for. Anyone else can chime in anywhere!

I'm not prepared to decide on the whole set of solutions related to GLEP
55 yet. I need more time to think about them, and since new options are
showing up frequently, it makes that pretty hard. Here's what action I'd
like to see regarding the whole thing:

Petteri, Tiziano, and Alec agree to work together to update & maintain a
single document describing our requirements, the potential solutions,
how well they address the requirements, and what the downsides (and any
other upsides) are. If just 1-2 of them want to do this, that's fine
too. All 3 of them have written something along these lines already,
which is why I suggest them.


> GLEP 54: handling code from SCMs better
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Some discussion on list. Luca, can you sum up the state of things?

Still waiting on a summary ... perhaps if Luca's too busy, our wonderful
new secretary could do something along the lines of the above doc?



Making choices without a clear and straightforward comparison of options
right next to each other is not the greatest. So the actions I propose
for today's meeting are:

- Approve new council member

- Get people to agree to get a doc w/ requirements & comparisons for:
- GLEP 54 (Luca or Thomas?)
- GLEP 55 (Petteri/Tiziano/Alec)


--
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Developer, Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:26 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org