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 02-10-2011, 07:49 PM
Diego Elio Pettenò
 
Default Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

Il giorno gio, 10/02/2011 alle 14.08 -0600, Ryan Hill ha scritto:
> Hey, here's an idea. Before you go making big masks like this for
> packages
> several people depend on, maybe try looking for a maintainer.

That is *exactly* what these masks are. And you should know there is
*no* "five minutes fix".

--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
 
Old 02-10-2011, 08:03 PM
"Andreas K. Huettel"
 
Default Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

On Thursday 10 February 2011 21:49:53 Diego Elio Petten wrote:
> Il giorno gio, 10/02/2011 alle 14.08 -0600, Ryan Hill ha scritto:
> > Hey, here's an idea. Before you go making big masks like this for
> > packages
> > several people depend on, maybe try looking for a maintainer.
>
> That is *exactly* what these masks are. And you should know there is
> *no* "five minutes fix".

Hey come on. If you really wanted to find a maintainer, you'd have given me
the time to check back with upstream instead of just refusing a revert.

Packages oscillating in and out of package mask (however broken) is also not
nice for the user.

--

Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/
 
Old 02-10-2011, 08:57 PM
Diego Elio Pettenò
 
Default Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

Il giorno gio, 10/02/2011 alle 22.03 +0100, Andreas K. Huettel ha
scritto:
> Hey come on. If you really wanted to find a maintainer, you'd have
> given me
> the time to check back with upstream instead of just refusing a
> revert.

You get to maintain (and unmask) the package *after* it's fixed. Not
before.

Unmasking a package that is *broken* because you feel you *may* get the
next version working is simply wrong.

If you really wanted to fix it this bad, you would have done so rather
than spent the time bitching on the mailing list.

Repeat after me: "I won't unmask packages until they are fixed".

--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
 
Old 02-10-2011, 11:15 PM
Ryan Hill
 
Default Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 21:49:53 +0100
Diego Elio Petten <flameeyes@gmail.com> wrote:

> Il giorno gio, 10/02/2011 alle 14.08 -0600, Ryan Hill ha scritto:
> > Hey, here's an idea. Before you go making big masks like this for
> > packages
> > several people depend on, maybe try looking for a maintainer.
>
> That is *exactly* what these masks are. And you should know there is
> *no* "five minutes fix".

Seriously? You prefer to let things get so bad it has to be removed before
looking for someone to work on it? If you think this is a better way to do
QA than an email saying "Hey, this package needs some attention. Anyone want
to look at it before it gets too bad?" then I really don't know what to say.


--
fonts, gcc-porting, it makes no sense how it makes no sense
toolchain, wxwidgets but i'll take it free anytime
@ gentoo.org EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662
 
Old 02-10-2011, 11:42 PM
Alec Warner
 
Default Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 21:49:53 +0100
> Diego Elio Petten <flameeyes@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Il giorno gio, 10/02/2011 alle 14.08 -0600, Ryan Hill ha scritto:
>> > Hey, here's an idea. *Before you go making big masks like this for
>> > packages
>> > several people depend on, maybe try looking for a maintainer.
>>
>> That is *exactly* what these masks are. And you should know there is
>> *no* "five minutes fix".
>
> Seriously? *You prefer to let things get so bad it has to be removed before
> looking for someone to work on it? *If you think this is a better way to do
> QA than an email saying "Hey, this package needs some attention. Anyone want
> to look at it before it gets too bad?" then I really don't know what to say.

1) Most of the packages touched in this manner are usually
maintainer-wanted / needed or haven't been touched in years. I don't
think sending email every week saying 'hey who wants to work on fixing
X' is really that effective in getting help.

2) What is effective is masking a package and telling people you are
doing to delete it in X days. Audiences who do not read email (or do
not subscribe to this list) notice when they can't install something
anymore.

Is it annoying to folks? Sure. I'm not sure how much more annoying
it is than trying to build some package that has been in the tree
since 2004 but hasn't been touched since 2007 and doesn't build on a
modern system.

I would prefer this process not become the perfect bureaucratic storm.

-A

>
>
> --
> fonts, gcc-porting, * * * * * * * * *it makes no sense how it makes no sense
> toolchain, wxwidgets * * * * * * * * * * * * * but i'll take it free anytime
> @ gentoo.org * * * * * * * *EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662
>
 
Old 02-11-2011, 04:40 AM
Samuli Suominen
 
Default Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

On 02/10/2011 11:03 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> On Thursday 10 February 2011 21:49:53 Diego Elio Petten wrote:
>> Il giorno gio, 10/02/2011 alle 14.08 -0600, Ryan Hill ha scritto:
>>> Hey, here's an idea. Before you go making big masks like this for
>>> packages
>>> several people depend on, maybe try looking for a maintainer.
>>
>> That is *exactly* what these masks are. And you should know there is
>> *no* "five minutes fix".
>
> Hey come on. If you really wanted to find a maintainer, you'd have given me
> the time to check back with upstream instead of just refusing a revert.
>
> Packages oscillating in and out of package mask (however broken) is also not
> nice for the user.
>

I'm not sure if you understand opensync then, there's 3-4 series in tree
and mostly not compatible with each other:
0.22, 0.36, 0.39 and latest being live 9999.

What you suggested about reverting would have exposed all of them to
users again. Fixing latest is *not* enough.

Instead you should unmask what you *have fixed* per series (version).

- Samuli
 
Old 02-11-2011, 07:17 AM
"Andreas K. Huettel"
 
Default Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

On Thursday 10 February 2011 22:57:41 Diego Elio Petten wrote:
[snip]

Repeat after me: "Politeness and professional courtesy is an integral part of
our QA team policy."

--

Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/
 
Old 02-11-2011, 08:23 AM
Diego Elio Pettenò
 
Default Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

Il giorno ven, 11/02/2011 alle 09.17 +0100, Andreas K. Huettel ha
scritto:
>
> Repeat after me: "Politeness and professional courtesy is an integral
> part of
> our QA team policy."

Politeness is due where politeness is received. If you keep
second-guessing QA team, without looking at the packages at all (see
Samuli's mail) you're not going to receive any.

--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
 
Old 02-11-2011, 02:31 PM
Ciaran McCreesh
 
Default Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 10:23:19 +0100
Diego Elio Petten <flameeyes@gmail.com> wrote:
> Politeness is due where politeness is received. If you keep
> second-guessing QA team, without looking at the packages at all (see
> Samuli's mail) you're not going to receive any.

Sorry, but that violates the devrel Etiquette Policy [1], which quite
clearly states that:

One should try to not be rude, abusive or impolite under any
circumstances.

I look forward to seeing your proposed change to QA policy to bring it
in line with this requirement.

[1]: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=3&chap=2

--
Ciaran McCreesh
 
Old 02-12-2011, 04:45 AM
Ryan Hill
 
Default Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 07:40:53 +0200
Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 02/10/2011 11:03 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> I'm not sure if you understand opensync then, there's 3-4 series in tree
> and mostly not compatible with each other:
> 0.22, 0.36, 0.39 and latest being live 9999.

0.39 is fixed. 0.36 we'll keep around since very few of the plugins seem to
be ported to 0.39 (just looking at the dependencies), but it needs a lot more
work than 0.39. I know barry needs 0.22 but I looked at cherry-picking some
upstream patches to bring it up to date a few months ago. If there are no
other users then I think we should stabilize 0.36 once it's resolved and drop
0.22. I'm not interested in maintaining the live ebuild but I can get it up
to date at least.


--
fonts, gcc-porting, it makes no sense how it makes no sense
toolchain, wxwidgets but i'll take it free anytime
@ gentoo.org EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 03:04 AM.

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