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 06-08-2011, 10:17 AM
Dirkjan Ochtman
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in app-arch/bzip2: bzip2-1.0.5-r1.ebuild

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 11:45, Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> IMO we should just make repoman commit update the ChangeLog.
>
> Then repoman commit should have a flag to leave out removals from
> ChangeLog entries so unlazy people can still leave the cruft out from them.
>
> Ref. http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=365373

I disagree; I think having the information about removed packages is useful.

Cheers,

Dirkjan
 
Old 06-08-2011, 11:17 AM
Duncan
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in app-arch/bzip2: bzip2-1.0.5-r1.ebuild

Dale posted on Tue, 07 Jun 2011 22:45:34 -0500 as excerpted:

> Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Tuesday, June 07, 2011 19:41:20 Dale wrote:
>>
>>> I have a question or two. I don't care if you, or others, reply to
>>> this with a answer, just think on it. A policy, rule if you will, has
>>> been decided on by the council. This after MUCH discussion on this
>>> list and the council hearing both sides of the argument. You,
>>> apparently on your own or with a few others, have decided to ignore
>>> the policy or rule.
>>>
>> umm, no, ive done no such thing. try again. -mike
>>
>>
> Let me see if I understand this correctly. Most devs and some users
> wants things put in the changelog. I don't know if it was you before
> but in the past someone didn't want to put when versions are removed.
> That person, whoever it was, said they were not going to do it because
> it was silly or whatever. This was taken to the council and it was
> decided that all changes had to be put in the changelog. Now in this
> thread, about the same thing from my understanding. You said "waste of
> time" and the policy is not "sane".
>
> So, council says it has to be done. You say you won't. Tell me where I
> missed the point here.

Mike's actually correct.

He didn't say he was going to defy council, rather, that he simply
wouldn't be removing ebuilds /at/ /all/ until either the changelog is auto-
generated (making the case moot) or the council changes policy.

That means they'll either fall to someone else to do, or will simply
remain there, but either way, it's quite different from directly defying
the council decision.

Gentoo devs are volunteers in any case, and as such, the system, to the
degree that it works at all, does so because volunteers are (within
reason) allowed to have their foibles and the system ultimately works
around them. Because everyone has their foibles and if "the system"
couldn't work around them, "the system" would quickly cease to be!

--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
 
Old 06-08-2011, 12:55 PM
Rich Freeman
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in app-arch/bzip2: bzip2-1.0.5-r1.ebuild

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 7:17 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
> He didn't say he was going to defy council, rather, that he simply
> wouldn't be removing ebuilds /at/ /all/ until either the changelog is auto-
> generated (making the case moot) or the council changes policy.
>
> That means they'll either fall to someone else to do, or will simply
> remain there, but either way, it's quite different from directly defying
> the council decision.
>

As long as all versions in the tree compile cleanly and are free from
security issues, I don't see any issue with keeping older ebuilds
around. If anything I think that some packages are too quick to
remove ~arch versions. I run stable but accept the odd ~arch package.
When I do accept a ~arch package I only accept one version of it with
the goal of going stable once whatever drove me to accept ~arch gets
there. When the ~arch package disappears I just have to re-evaluate
my new options and try again, and sometimes it feels like I never end
up in stable. (I do realize that a few types of packages will
probably never be stable by their nature, and that is fine.)

If old versions become QA issues then we already have processes to
deal with that. It is the duty of maintainers to deal with such
problems.

In any case, the rule is simple - if you remove an ebuild you have to
include a note in the Changelog. That could change, or it might not,
or perhaps it will become automated, but either way it is the rule
right now.

One thing I will say is that I appreciate the civility in this thread
so far. I think everybody on both sides of the issue realizes that
this is contentious, and I think everybody would be open to a better
solution.

Rich
 
Old 06-08-2011, 05:01 PM
Mike Frysinger
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in app-arch/bzip2: bzip2-1.0.5-r1.ebuild

On Tuesday, June 07, 2011 23:44:49 Michał Górny wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 17:45:03 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 07, 2011 17:36:59 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 17:35:11 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > > And yes, it should be automated. I agree. Doesn't change the
> > > > > current situation.
> > > >
> > > > of course it does. it makes the current situation irrelevant.
> > >
> > > Does this mean we should shortly be expecting to see you do the
> > > work to migrate the tree to Git and to automate ChangeLog
> > > generation?
> >
> > the tree has already been migrated. automatic ChangeLog generation
> > is trivial to implement, and many many projects already have scripts
> > to do it.
>
> Including portage's egencache which can generate ChangeLogs from git.
> Just a side note.

very cool ... wasnt aware of that guy, thanks
-mike
 
Old 06-08-2011, 05:04 PM
Mike Frysinger
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in app-arch/bzip2: bzip2-1.0.5-r1.ebuild

On Tuesday, June 07, 2011 23:45:34 Dale wrote:
> So, council says it has to be done. You say you won't. Tell me where I
> missed the point here.

you missed the point as soon as you incorrectly stated that i said i wont.
thus the rest of your e-mail is useless noise.
-mike
 
Old 06-08-2011, 05:06 PM
Mike Frysinger
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in app-arch/bzip2: bzip2-1.0.5-r1.ebuild

On Wednesday, June 08, 2011 05:27:27 Patrick Lauer wrote:
> So you say that you want to follow the rules but accidentally forgot it?

no idea what you're talking about. the new policy has 0 relevance to actions
performed before said policy went into effect.
-mike
 
Old 06-08-2011, 05:40 PM
Matt Turner
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in app-arch/bzip2: bzip2-1.0.5-r1.ebuild

On Wed, Jun 8, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday, June 08, 2011 05:27:27 Patrick Lauer wrote:
>> So you say that you want to follow the rules but accidentally forgot it?
>
> no idea what you're talking about. *the new policy has 0 relevance to actions
> performed before said policy went into effect.
> -mike

Right, to be perfectly clear, the initial email in this thread was
from halcy0n (May 16), and it was about something that happened before
the new policy.

Mike's first reply in this thread was after the new policy and was 3
weeks later on Jun 7.

Matt
 
Old 06-08-2011, 06:00 PM
Mike Frysinger
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in app-arch/bzip2: bzip2-1.0.5-r1.ebuild

On Wednesday, June 08, 2011 13:40:49 Matt Turner wrote:
> and was 3 weeks later on Jun 7.

i havent had much time for Gentoo lately :/. but maybe people think that's
good so i'll stop being a hassle.
-mike
 
Old 06-08-2011, 06:48 PM
Dale
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in app-arch/bzip2: bzip2-1.0.5-r1.ebuild

Mike Frysinger wrote:

On Tuesday, June 07, 2011 23:45:34 Dale wrote:


So, council says it has to be done. You say you won't. Tell me where I
missed the point here.


you missed the point as soon as you incorrectly stated that i said i wont.
thus the rest of your e-mail is useless noise.
-mike



So, you are saying that you won't be doing anything that will require
you to add entries to the changelog. That works. It doesn't do much
for the packages you maintain but that doesn't break the rules either.


Let's just hope in the meantime things stay stable.

Dale

:-) :-)
 
Old 06-08-2011, 07:57 PM
Mike Frysinger
 
Default gentoo-x86 commit in app-arch/bzip2: bzip2-1.0.5-r1.ebuild

On Wednesday, June 08, 2011 13:04:08 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday, June 07, 2011 23:45:34 Dale wrote:
> > So, council says it has to be done. You say you won't. Tell me where I
> > missed the point here.
>
> you missed the point as soon as you incorrectly stated that i said i wont.
> thus the rest of your e-mail is useless noise.

sorry, this was probably overly dismissive. let's rephrase to something like
"the long e-mails were redundant/rhetorical and incorrectly attempted to apply
to me".
-mike
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 10:04 PM.

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