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 03-12-2010, 10:46 PM
Ben de Groot
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

On 13 March 2010 00:07, Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 18:33:12 +0100
> Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Abandoned packages do not belong in the portage tree. That's
>> why we have a treecleaners project.
>
> The treecleaners project is tasked with keeping these packages working, and
> removing them only if there is no other alternative.

No, treecleaners is tasked with either finding a maintainer for those
packages, or removing them from the tree.

Cheers,
--
Ben de Groot
Gentoo Linux developer (qt, media, lxde, desktop-misc)
__________________________________________________ ____
 
Old 03-13-2010, 09:25 AM
Samuli Suominen
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

On 03/13/2010 01:07 AM, Ryan Hill wrote:
> On Fri, 12 Mar 2010 18:33:12 +0100
> Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>> On 12 March 2010 16:59, Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>> Or like the old gtk-1: completely abandon the package and let the
>>> consumers upgrade slowly. IMHO this is the less annoying approach for
>>> everyone.
>>
>> Abandoned packages do not belong in the portage tree. That's
>> why we have a treecleaners project.
>
> The treecleaners project is tasked with keeping these packages working, and
> removing them only if there is no other alternative.
>
>

That's the ideal situation, unfortunately treecleaners is currently so
understaffed it's not necessarily always true

if a package is broken, and been in treecleaners queue for too long, and
it would be a semi-trivial fix, it simply doesn't get done without manpower

So devs: Please join treecleaners project
 
Old 03-13-2010, 09:34 AM
Matti Bickel
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

Samuli Suominen wrote:
> if a package is broken, and been in treecleaners queue for too long, and
> it would be a semi-trivial fix, it simply doesn't get done without manpower

Because i can't find this info on the treecleaner project page: is there
a bugzilla query for the "treecleaners queue", so others can take a
look/help out?

I have found 4 bugs assigned to treecleaner@gentoo.org, but i'm sure i
missed something.
 
Old 03-13-2010, 09:45 AM
Doktor Notor
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 11:34:22 +0100
Matti Bickel <mabi@gentoo.org> wrote:

> I have found 4 bugs assigned to treecleaner@gentoo.org, but i'm sure i
> missed something.
>

If you have time to spare, bugs assigned to maintainer-needed@ and
often rotting in bugzilla for ages despite having patches included will
give you lots of stuff to play with for starters

Perhaps the treecleaners alias should watch the m-needed@ bugs,
dunno.
 
Old 03-13-2010, 10:49 AM
Samuli Suominen
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

On 03/13/2010 12:34 PM, Matti Bickel wrote:
> Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> if a package is broken, and been in treecleaners queue for too long, and
>> it would be a semi-trivial fix, it simply doesn't get done without manpower
>
> Because i can't find this info on the treecleaner project page: is there
> a bugzilla query for the "treecleaners queue", so others can take a
> look/help out?
>
> I have found 4 bugs assigned to treecleaner@gentoo.org, but i'm sure i
> missed something.
>
>

Look also for bugs where treecleaner@ is in CC list.

19 bugs currently, so not that bad at the moment but even some of these
could be saved.
 
Old 03-13-2010, 10:54 AM
Markos Chandras
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

On Friday 12 March 2010 15:18:21 Robert Bradbury wrote:
> It would appear that the pending (0321) mask of Qt3 will break
> sci-misc/qcad, sci-chemistry/xdrawchem and x11-misc/glunarclock.
>
[..]
>
> Thank you,
> Robert Bradbury
The decision about removing Qt3 has been made 9 months ago, the decision about
the upcoming mask has been made 4 months ago. So you had all the time to move
to Qt4. We aint gonna maintain a package ( or library if you prefer ) that has
been abandoned from upstream a long time ago. So if you still want to use it,
please add kde-sunset overlay. We dont have neither the manpower nor the time
to patch/fix/maintainer/etc/etc/ Qt3 anymore. However, we DO offer you like 6
different versions of Qt4
*4.5.3
*4.6.1
*4.6.2
*4.6.9999
*4.7.9999
*4.7-prerelease ( soon )
*4.9999

Which we actively maintain. We decided to move forward and we are aware that
few of our users might not like it. If you still want a working Qt3, please
take care of it on kde-sunset

Thanks

--
Markos Chandras (hwoarang)
Gentoo Linux Developer
Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org
 
Old 03-14-2010, 04:09 AM
James Cloos
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

>>>>> "BdG" == Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org> writes:

BdG> Abandoned packages do not belong in the portage tree.

Nonsense. That attitude only servers to harm the user base.

Leaving them in does not.

-JimC
--
James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6
 
Old 03-14-2010, 06:18 AM
Maciej Mrozowski
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

On Sunday 14 of March 2010 06:09:44 James Cloos wrote:
> >>>>> "BdG" == Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org> writes:
> BdG> Abandoned packages do not belong in the portage tree.
>
> Nonsense. That attitude only servers to harm the user base.
>
> Leaving them in does not.

But leaving them broken and unmaintained in main repository harms Gentoo
quality and image.
"User base" is welcome to step up and help with maintenance and that's what
guys in kde-sunsite overlay actually do.

So... patches welcome! Thanks!

--
regards
MM
 
Old 03-14-2010, 09:36 AM
Ben de Groot
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

On 14 March 2010 06:09, James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> wrote:
>>>>>> "BdG" == Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org> writes:
>
> BdG> Abandoned packages do not belong in the portage tree.
>
> Nonsense. *That attitude only servers to harm the user base.

You're wrong. It serves to protect our users from potentially
broken and vulnerable packages. It ascertains a Quality
Assurance level that we and our users can be comfortable
with.

> Leaving them in does not.

It does, as it opens the users up to unknown security
vulnerabilities and increasing brokenness as bugs are
not addressed.

If Gentoo would stop caring about QA, then we'd be wasting
our time working on making this a better distro.

Cheers,
--
Ben de Groot
Gentoo Linux developer (qt, media, lxde, desktop-misc)
__________________________________________________ ____
 
Old 03-20-2010, 06:04 PM
James Cloos
 
Default Qt3 mask breaks significant science packages

>>>>> "BdG" == Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org> writes:

BdG> On 14 March 2010 06:09, James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> "BdG" == Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org> writes:
>>
BdG> Abandoned packages do not belong in the portage tree.
>>
>> Nonsense. *That attitude only servers to harm the user base.

BdG> You're wrong. It serves to protect our users from potentially
BdG> broken and vulnerable packages.

Any user who needs *that* much hand-holding will use a binary dist,
not a source dist.

BdG> It ascertains a Quality Assurance level that we and our users can
BdG> be comfortable with.

No, it does not. The user base for a build-locally-from-source dist
wants wider access, not just a few packages.

>> Leaving them in does not.

BdG> It does, as it opens the users up to unknown security
BdG> vulnerabilities and increasing brokenness as bugs are
BdG> not addressed.

Removing the ebuilds does not help that even one bit. IF they do not
use those programs, they are not harmed even if there is some (real)
vulnerability -- and don't forget that most of the vulnerability claims
are for things which will never happen in practice. (Which is not to
suggest that upstreams shouldn't code defensively, just that not every
warning is critical enough to loose sleep over.)

BdG> If Gentoo would stop caring about QA, then we'd be wasting
BdG> our time working on making this a better distro.

Removing ebuilds is not in itself QA. It does not in itself improve
quality. There has to be a real reason to remove.

Removing a leaf package which has been replaced by its upstream, whether
by a simple rename or by a complete re-implementation or anywhere
inbetween, is a good call.

Removing a widely-used, well-designed and well-managed library and
everything which depends on it, just because upstream has stopped
dealing with bug reports against that version, is not. The likelyhood
that any significant issues remain in qt3 is small. The relevant apps
work, have been working and will continue to work.

I will not begrudge the kde team for wanting to support only kde4.

Dropping kde3 in favour of kde4 is just an upgrade.

But dropping qt3 even though packages exist which depend on it and have
not been ported to qt4 (and it *is* a /port/, *not* an /upgrade/) is
simply the wrong thing to do.

It is also OK to mask -- but not necessarily remove -- a package with a
truly exploitable bug; moreso if the package is itself security-related.
That means real exploits in the wild, real attempts to do harm.

The so-called qa team has been acting too robotically. It needs to show
more common sense and better judgement. Worry about the real problems,
not the trivial. Work to fix packages, not to murder them.

-JimC
--
James Cloos <cloos@jhcloos.com> OpenPGP: 1024D/ED7DAEA6
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 12:02 AM.

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