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 03-08-2011, 01:51 PM
Alexis Ballier
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in x11-libs/libva: ChangeLog libva-1.0.10.ebuild

On Tuesday, March 08, 2011 09:28:13 AM Tomas Chvatal (scarabeus) wrote:
> scarabeus 11/03/08 12:28:13
>
> Modified: ChangeLog
> Added: libva-1.0.10.ebuild
> Log:
> Update to libva shipped by freedesktop. So we do the same as debian or
> archlinux. Fixes bug #336854.
>

Please read metadata.xml before committing...
How comes I'm supposed to be the maintainer and have not seen any single
discussion about it ? Why is it better, etc ? Being a "mouton de Panurge" is
not a reason [1]
The only "better" thing I see is a greater version number. May I suggest you
to run a diff and explain me why such a change was needed ?

Without a convincing answer within a couple of days, I will delete this
ebuild.


Alexis.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panurge
 
Old 03-08-2011, 02:23 PM
Tomáš Chvátal
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in x11-libs/libva: ChangeLog libva-1.0.10.ebuild

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dne 8.3.2011 15:51, Alexis Ballier napsal(a):
> On Tuesday, March 08, 2011 09:28:13 AM Tomas Chvatal (scarabeus) wrote:
>> scarabeus 11/03/08 12:28:13
>>
>> Modified: ChangeLog
>> Added: libva-1.0.10.ebuild
>> Log:
>> Update to libva shipped by freedesktop. So we do the same as debian or
>> archlinux. Fixes bug #336854.
>>
>
> Please read metadata.xml before committing...
I did, x11 is the herd last time i looked.
> How comes I'm supposed to be the maintainer and have not seen any single
> discussion about it ? Why is it better, etc ? Being a "mouton de Panurge" is
> not a reason [1]
> The only "better" thing I see is a greater version number. May I suggest you
> to run a diff and explain me why such a change was needed ?
>

ok lovely list:
1) it has freedesktop web page, and we should preffer fdo alternatives
anyway
2) it has existing git repo (could not find repo for the va you use)
3) debian/archlinux/fedora use this one I commited, not former one.
4) the bug was reported to you with x11 CC and you had 6 months already
to at least reply to it why/if you don't agree with the switch.
Suprisingly we try to close long-open bugs with no-maintainer reply.

Cheers

Tomas
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk12SdcACgkQHB6c3gNBRYfRZQCfUa0wcNLoWL vrVbjIuro3ApPA
h/IAn1FJAszTno8g+QVdpblydnpWOgpo
=MRvO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
Old 03-09-2011, 02:52 AM
Ryan Hill
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in x11-libs/libva: ChangeLog libva-1.0.10.ebuild

On Tue, 08 Mar 2011 16:23:03 +0100
Tomáš Chvátal <scarabeus@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 1) it has freedesktop web page, and we should preffer fdo alternatives
> anyway
> 2) it has existing git repo (could not find repo for the va you use)
> 3) debian/archlinux/fedora use this one I commited, not former one.
> 4) the bug was reported to you with x11 CC and you had 6 months already
> to at least reply to it why/if you don't agree with the switch.
> Suprisingly we try to close long-open bugs with no-maintainer reply.

too bad it doesn't compile. :/

bug #357937

--
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 03-09-2011, 11:08 AM
Alexis Ballier
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in x11-libs/libva: ChangeLog libva-1.0.10.ebuild

On Tuesday, March 08, 2011 12:23:03 PM Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> Dne 8.3.2011 15:51, Alexis Ballier napsal(a):
> > On Tuesday, March 08, 2011 09:28:13 AM Tomas Chvatal (scarabeus) wrote:
> >> scarabeus 11/03/08 12:28:13
> >>
> >> Modified: ChangeLog
> >> Added: libva-1.0.10.ebuild
> >> Log:
> >> Update to libva shipped by freedesktop. So we do the same as debian or
> >>
> >> archlinux. Fixes bug #336854.
> >
> > Please read metadata.xml before committing...
>
> I did, x11 is the herd last time i looked.

x11 is the herd because when I added it I thought that it was low level enough
that x11 may help from time to time. This never gave the right to anyone to
break and hijack it without discussion nor notice like you did.
Since it seems to be more a burden than a help, I'll remove x11 herd from
metadata too when removing the fdo version.

Maybe something you didn't understand: herd/maintainership isn't about
territoriality and giving the right to commit crap, it's about area of
responsability.

>
> > How comes I'm supposed to be the maintainer and have not seen any single
> > discussion about it ? Why is it better, etc ? Being a "mouton de Panurge"
> > is not a reason [1]
> > The only "better" thing I see is a greater version number. May I suggest
> > you to run a diff and explain me why such a change was needed ?
>
> ok lovely list:
> 1) it has freedesktop web page, and we should preffer fdo alternatives
> anyway

yes, didnt you think that maybe there's a reason I've been using the sds
version for almost one year ?

> 2) it has existing git repo (could not find repo for the va you use)

you clearly didnt run a diff... its the fdo version + a debian/patches dir
with, heh, some fixes and improvements I'm using...

> 3) debian/archlinux/fedora use this one I commited, not former one.

so what?

> 4) the bug was reported to you with x11 CC and you had 6 months already
> to at least reply to it why/if you don't agree with the switch.
> Suprisingly we try to close long-open bugs with no-maintainer reply.

There was no reply because I didn't see the point, for now, to flame users by
telling them that a version number doesnt necessarily bring them more code nor
features. I thought gentoo developers were aware of that. I was wrong.
I left it open because I thought, at some point, that we will not need the sds
version. I don't think it's the case now.

Seeing that I bumped it ~1 week ago, did you really expect that it was an
abandonned package and that you were saving it ? Were you trying to hijack it?
Or maybe just piss me off ?

A.
 
Old 03-09-2011, 12:13 PM
Tomáš Chvátal
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in x11-libs/libva: ChangeLog libva-1.0.10.ebuild

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Dne 9.3.2011 13:08, Alexis Ballier napsal(a):
> On Tuesday, March 08, 2011 12:23:03 PM Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
>> Dne 8.3.2011 15:51, Alexis Ballier napsal(a):
>>> On Tuesday, March 08, 2011 09:28:13 AM Tomas Chvatal (scarabeus) wrote:
>>>> scarabeus 11/03/08 12:28:13
>>>>
>>>> Modified: ChangeLog
>>>> Added: libva-1.0.10.ebuild
>>>> Log:
>>>> Update to libva shipped by freedesktop. So we do the same as debian or
>>>>
>>>> archlinux. Fixes bug #336854.
>>>
>>> Please read metadata.xml before committing...
>>
>> I did, x11 is the herd last time i looked.
>
> x11 is the herd because when I added it I thought that it was low level enough
> that x11 may help from time to time. This never gave the right to anyone to
> break and hijack it without discussion nor notice like you did.
> Since it seems to be more a burden than a help, I'll remove x11 herd from
> metadata too when removing the fdo version.
>
> Maybe something you didn't understand: herd/maintainership isn't about
> territoriality and giving the right to commit crap, it's about area of
> responsability.
>
>>
>>> How comes I'm supposed to be the maintainer and have not seen any single
>>> discussion about it ? Why is it better, etc ? Being a "mouton de Panurge"
>>> is not a reason [1]
>>> The only "better" thing I see is a greater version number. May I suggest
>>> you to run a diff and explain me why such a change was needed ?
>>
>> ok lovely list:
>> 1) it has freedesktop web page, and we should preffer fdo alternatives
>> anyway
>
> yes, didnt you think that maybe there's a reason I've been using the sds
> version for almost one year ?
You never named them anywhere.
>
>> 2) it has existing git repo (could not find repo for the va you use)
>
> you clearly didnt run a diff... its the fdo version + a debian/patches dir
> with, heh, some fixes and improvements I'm using...
I did run a diff, what am I supposed to trust some weird patches not
signed or commited to some repo...
>
>> 3) debian/archlinux/fedora use this one I commited, not former one.
>
> so what?
We have this tendency to use what others do so...
>
>> 4) the bug was reported to you with x11 CC and you had 6 months already
>> to at least reply to it why/if you don't agree with the switch.
>> Suprisingly we try to close long-open bugs with no-maintainer reply.
>
> There was no reply because I didn't see the point, for now, to flame users by
> telling them that a version number doesnt necessarily bring them more code nor
> features. I thought gentoo developers were aware of that. I was wrong.
> I left it open because I thought, at some point, that we will not need the sds
> version. I don't think it's the case now.
So first you say you was not aware of the discussion, now you say you
just didn't feel the need to reply.
I did see that you commited copied version of older one, given the fancy
amount of people just doing cp a b for version bumps and not bothering
by any bugs I just went ahead and looked what other guys does and made
it same. I would commit the update even if it would be libva-0.0.1 I
didn't do it for sake of the version.
>
> Seeing that I bumped it ~1 week ago, did you really expect that it was an
> abandonned package and that you were saving it ? Were you trying to hijack it?
> Or maybe just piss me off ?
>

Just consider I tried to piss you off if you have this attitude. I could
not care less about some libva if i would not be looking on that bug for
some time without any damn reply from maintainer and x11 in CC.

I usually ask on irc, but given the fact you don't bother with the
media... just remove x11 from herds and enjoy your package.

You might also consider dropping x11 from x11-libs/vdpau-video

Cheerios
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk13fQ4ACgkQHB6c3gNBRYe7uQCfYDna/Scn7UHhic5V6shuk70p
PvUAn2ijeJeu0qdwyvT3avR48k1tXJ/m
=xp8D
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
 
Old 03-09-2011, 12:48 PM
Jeremy Olexa
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in x11-libs/libva: ChangeLog libva-1.0.10.ebuild

On 03/09/2011 06:08 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote:


Or maybe just piss me off ?


Please calm down. I would have taken some action too if it was in my bug
queue (via CC) and the primary maintainer didn't respond for 6 months.
It isn't flaming the users to respond and acknowledge their work but
politely refusing.


-Jeremy
 
Old 03-09-2011, 12:53 PM
Alexis Ballier
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in x11-libs/libva: ChangeLog libva-1.0.10.ebuild

On Wednesday, March 09, 2011 10:13:50 AM Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> Dne 9.3.2011 13:08, Alexis Ballier napsal(a):
> > On Tuesday, March 08, 2011 12:23:03 PM Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
> >> Dne 8.3.2011 15:51, Alexis Ballier napsal(a):
> >>> On Tuesday, March 08, 2011 09:28:13 AM Tomas Chvatal (scarabeus) wrote:
> >>>> scarabeus 11/03/08 12:28:13
> >>>>
> >>>> Modified: ChangeLog
> >>>> Added: libva-1.0.10.ebuild
> >>>> Log:
> >>>> Update to libva shipped by freedesktop. So we do the same as debian
> >>>> or
> >>>>
> >>>> archlinux. Fixes bug #336854.
> >>>
> >>> Please read metadata.xml before committing...
> >>
> >> I did, x11 is the herd last time i looked.
> >
> > x11 is the herd because when I added it I thought that it was low level
> > enough that x11 may help from time to time. This never gave the right to
> > anyone to break and hijack it without discussion nor notice like you
> > did.
> > Since it seems to be more a burden than a help, I'll remove x11 herd from
> > metadata too when removing the fdo version.
> >
> > Maybe something you didn't understand: herd/maintainership isn't about
> > territoriality and giving the right to commit crap, it's about area of
> > responsability.
> >
> >>> How comes I'm supposed to be the maintainer and have not seen any
> >>> single discussion about it ? Why is it better, etc ? Being a "mouton
> >>> de Panurge" is not a reason [1]
> >>> The only "better" thing I see is a greater version number. May I
> >>> suggest you to run a diff and explain me why such a change was needed
> >>> ?
> >>
> >> ok lovely list:
> >> 1) it has freedesktop web page, and we should preffer fdo alternatives
> >> anyway
> >
> > yes, didnt you think that maybe there's a reason I've been using the sds
> > version for almost one year ?
>
> You never named them anywhere.

Indeed, I always thought that's the one that wants to change something that
needs to explain why. Moreover, I understood you don't care about them since
you didn't even bother to ask before committing.
As for the reasons: "its the fdo version + a debian/patches dir with, heh,
some fixes and improvements I'm using..."

>
> >> 2) it has existing git repo (could not find repo for the va you use)
> >
> > you clearly didnt run a diff... its the fdo version + a debian/patches
> > dir with, heh, some fixes and improvements I'm using...
>
> I did run a diff, what am I supposed to trust some weird patches not
> signed or commited to some repo...

you can, eg, review the patches, and decide if you want them or not

>
> >> 3) debian/archlinux/fedora use this one I commited, not former one.
> >
> > so what?
>
> We have this tendency to use what others do so...

This is what I called being a "mouton de Panurge" in my first email I have
this tendency to use what I am convinced is the best.

> >> 4) the bug was reported to you with x11 CC and you had 6 months already
> >> to at least reply to it why/if you don't agree with the switch.
> >> Suprisingly we try to close long-open bugs with no-maintainer reply.
> >
> > There was no reply because I didn't see the point, for now, to flame
> > users by telling them that a version number doesnt necessarily bring
> > them more code nor features. I thought gentoo developers were aware of
> > that. I was wrong. I left it open because I thought, at some point, that
> > we will not need the sds version. I don't think it's the case now.
>
> So first you say you was not aware of the discussion, now you say you
> just didn't feel the need to reply.

Maybe we do not have the same definition of a "discussion". Nobody compared it
to the sds version, nobody said we should drop the sds version, the only thing
I've ever seen is that it has a greater version number...
A discussion would have been someone explaining why we should move away from
sds to fdo and we could have weighted the alternatives.

> I did see that you commited copied version of older one, given the fancy
> amount of people just doing cp a b for version bumps and not bothering
> by any bugs I just went ahead and looked what other guys does and made
> it same.

You shouldn't assume people are stupid by default in case of doubt, sending
an email never killed anyone.

> I would commit the update even if it would be libva-0.0.1 I
> didn't do it for sake of the version.
>
> > Seeing that I bumped it ~1 week ago, did you really expect that it was an
> > abandonned package and that you were saving it ? Were you trying to
> > hijack it? Or maybe just piss me off ?
>
> Just consider I tried to piss you off if you have this attitude. I could
> not care less about some libva if i would not be looking on that bug for
> some time without any damn reply from maintainer and x11 in CC.

A ping on the bug would have been more appropriate

> I usually ask on irc, but given the fact you don't bother with the
> media...

If I were on irc I would be idle most of the time. Email or bgo are more
reliable medias if you want to get an answer.

> just remove x11 from herds and enjoy your package.
>
> You might also consider dropping x11 from x11-libs/vdpau-video
>

fair enough

A.
 
Old 04-29-2011, 07:17 PM
Matt Turner
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in x11-libs/libva: ChangeLog libva-1.0.10.ebuild

2011/3/9 Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org>:
> As for the reasons: "its the fdo version + a debian/patches dir with, heh,
> some fixes and improvements I'm using..."

So, the SDS version is simply the freedesktop version with a few
patches on top? So, the freedesktop version is actually... upstream?

We patch plenty of things in Gentoo. Why are we depending on SDS to do
that for us?

Matt
 
Old 05-09-2011, 04:25 PM
Matt Turner
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in x11-libs/libva: ChangeLog libva-1.0.10.ebuild

2011/4/29 Matt Turner <mattst88@gentoo.org>:
> 2011/3/9 Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org>:
>> As for the reasons: "its the fdo version + a debian/patches dir with, heh,
>> some fixes and improvements I'm using..."
>
> So, the SDS version is simply the freedesktop version with a few
> patches on top? So, the freedesktop version is actually... upstream?
>
> We patch plenty of things in Gentoo. Why are we depending on SDS to do
> that for us?
>
> Matt

So...? Why are we shipping this version when it seems to be just the
upstream version + patches? People on the X11 team already have commit
access to freedesktop, and by extension, libva, so if the patches are
reasonable we could just commit them ourselves. Why are we bothering
with this SDS version?

You weren't kidding about not being on IRC. !seen aballier says 7 months ago.

Matt
 
Old 05-09-2011, 10:38 PM
Alexis Ballier
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in x11-libs/libva: ChangeLog libva-1.0.10.ebuild

On Monday, May 09, 2011 12:25:18 PM Matt Turner wrote:
> 2011/4/29 Matt Turner <mattst88@gentoo.org>:
> > 2011/3/9 Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org>:
> >> As for the reasons: "its the fdo version + a debian/patches dir with,
> >> heh, some fixes and improvements I'm using..."
> >
> > So, the SDS version is simply the freedesktop version with a few
> > patches on top? So, the freedesktop version is actually... upstream?
> >
> > We patch plenty of things in Gentoo. Why are we depending on SDS to do
> > that for us?
> >
> > Matt
>
> So...? Why are we shipping this version when it seems to be just the
> upstream version + patches? People on the X11 team already have commit
> access to freedesktop, and by extension, libva, so if the patches are
> reasonable we could just commit them ourselves. Why are we bothering
> with this SDS version?

maybe your answer is in the readme
http://www.splitted-desktop.com/~gbeauchesne/libva/patches/000_README

some of them are needed, some of them are useful, some we could certainly
drop. If the most important patches could go upstream then, again, I'm all for
going to fdo, but I'm not that enthusiastic about it (e.g. fdo git still
installs the test programs, they make """releases""" that don't even build,
etc...).

If it's for maintaining my own patchset with the sds patches then I prefer
using sds directly We could start excluding some sds patches to stop
applying them, bringing us closer to fdo though, it's just I don't see the
need. Feel free to propose me somes to drop with justifications


>
> You weren't kidding about not being on IRC. !seen aballier says 7 months
> ago.

Heh

A.
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 04:42 AM.

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