Re: [gentoo-dev] ChangeLog generation - pros and cons (council discussion request)
On 02-06-2011 17:15:11 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: All these problems are fixed if we don't re-generate the *existing* ChangeLogs. We should simply archive the existing ChangeLog, and append to it after the move to git. About this slightly hybrid approach: - the ChangeLog file is retained, some script just appends from VCS log to it * where is the ChangeLog file stored? * is the VCS log appended to the ChangeLog every time it is generated, or is it committed to the file? - in case of a committed update to the ChangeLog file (commit hook? repoman?), people would have the ability to edit the ChangeLog -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level
Re: [gentoo-dev] ChangeLog generation - pros and cons (council discussion request)
On Sun, Jun 5, 2011 at 1:30 PM, Fabian Groffen grob...@gentoo.org wrote: On 02-06-2011 17:15:11 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: All these problems are fixed if we don't re-generate the *existing* ChangeLogs. We should simply archive the existing ChangeLog, and append to it after the move to git. About this slightly hybrid approach: - the ChangeLog file is retained, some script just appends from VCS log to it * where is the ChangeLog file stored? * is the VCS log appended to the ChangeLog every time it is generated, or is it committed to the file? - in case of a committed update to the ChangeLog file (commit hook? repoman?), people would have the ability to edit the ChangeLog I would suggest these things (I've omitted details irrelevant to ChangeLog management): (1) Convert using cvs2git, archive the old cvs repo. We now have a git repo with full history. (2) The new git tree must be without ChangeLog or (optionally) non-DIST Manifests. Remove all crud, git commit -m Cleanup useless crud. Reason: no need to clutter the tree up with useless stuff that no one should touch. This will reduce the checked-out tree size by half. (3) No merge commits allowed to gentoo-x86.git. All commits must be rebased during pulls (git pull --rebase) or before pushing (git rebase git push). Reason: keeps the history simple and easy to follow. The server can be made to reject merge commits. Most centralized git repos already follow this model. (4) No forced pushes which rewrite history are allowed to the server. Reason: well, this one is obvious. A lot of servers are configured to completely disallow this. (5) ChangeLogs do not exist in the git tree, they're maintained in a separate git repo by a script[1]. Reason: a git repo with history allows us to debug problems with the script, and follow its progress. (6) ChangeLog is updated incrementally with each changeset[2] (or every $time?), and the changes committed to its own git repo. This is made possible by (3) and (4). Reason: this way the workload of generating the ChangeLog won't increase at O(n*m) with time[3]. (7) The rsync server just copies over ebuilds, and then ChangeLogs, re-manifests (introducing non-DIST manifests if needed), maybe signs everything, and then pushes to mirrors. [1]. Note that pkgmoves would have to be detected and handled properly. [2]. This involves updating old ChangeLog entries if there are new git notes. [3]. n is the no. of commits per package, and m is the total no. of packages in the portage tree. -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team
[gentoo-dev] Test request: open-iscsi 2.0.872
Hello! Would be great to have a few people test open-iscsi 2.0.872 before moving it from overlay betagarden to the main tree. To get it installed please run: # layman -a betagarden # emerge -av =sys-block/open-iscsi-2.0.872 Important: Please include a description of what you did while testing in your feedback. At best, post your feedback as a reply to bug 340425: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=340425 Thanks in advance! Best, Sebastian
[gentoo-dev] Re: Test request: open-iscsi 2.0.872
PS: I noticed the typo in gentoo-users@lists.g.o ^ and sent a new mail to gentoo-user@lists.g.o now. Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Test request: open-iscsi 2.0.872
On 2011.06.05 12:54, Sebastian Pipping wrote: Hello! Would be great to have a few people test open-iscsi 2.0.872 before moving it from overlay betagarden to the main tree. To get it installed please run: # layman -a betagarden # emerge -av =sys-block/open-iscsi-2.0.872 [snip] Best, Sebastian Sebastian, In the good old days, stuff like this would just be added to the tree either hard masked or not keyworded, or both. Why not still do that? I won't be testing as I have no use for the package. This is not a personal crit. I am just not a fan of overlays. -- Regards, Roy Bamford (Neddyseagoon) a member of gentoo-ops forum-mods trustees pgpVYTuopcfuS.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Test request: open-iscsi 2.0.872
Hi, Would be great to have a few people test open-iscsi 2.0.872 before moving it from overlay betagarden to the main tree. [...] In the good old days, stuff like this would just be added to the tree either hard masked or not keyworded, or both. Why not still do that? +1 I had tested the package already with the new ebuild I wrote for open-iscsi in #340425. Put the packet into the main tree, then I will test it again with my internal iSCSI setup. I don't like fiddling with overlays too much. AFAIR we already have 2.0.872 for genkernel anyways, so I don't see much need for pre-commit testing. Best regards, Craig
Re: [gentoo-dev] MULTI_ABI support addition to main tree portage
On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org wrote: On 06/02/2011 03:04 PM, Matt Turner wrote: For this problem, I think some kind of per-ebuild ABI_DEPENDENT flag should be used to recognize which packages ABI dependencies should apply to. Without thinking about it too hard, it seems like perhaps only packages in RDEPEND should be considered for ABI USE dependencies. We can express it with either of the existing PROPERTIES or RESTRICT variables. This way, we don't need to add a whole new variable every time that we decide to add a boolean flag like this. -- Thanks, Zac Hi Zac, Thanks for the response. Have you looked at Tommy[D]'s work? What do you think needs to happen for it to be merged? Thanks, Matt
[gentoo-dev] Automated Package Removal and Addition Tracker, for the week ending 2011-06-05 23h59 UTC
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed from the tree, for the week ending 2011-06-05 23h59 UTC. Removals: www-client/chromium-bin 2011-06-04 08:02:07 phajdan.jr Additions: dev-python/psutil 2011-05-30 10:00:03 radhermit dev-python/pygooglevoice2011-05-30 11:26:39 radhermit dev-python/progressbar 2011-05-30 11:51:57 radhermit app-misc/binwalk2011-05-30 23:37:54 radhermit x11-misc/wmname 2011-05-31 03:29:42 xmw x11-terms/st2011-05-31 03:40:26 xmw dev-python/pip 2011-05-31 11:45:36 radhermit dev-util/stubgen2011-05-31 19:28:42 angelos net-libs/libbtbb2011-05-31 19:47:28 binki net-libs/gsnmp 2011-06-01 02:12:08 jer app-doc/zsh-lovers 2011-06-01 18:11:49 tove app-misc/reptyr 2011-06-02 00:52:45 radhermit sci-electronics/drawtiming 2011-06-02 06:08:14 tomjbe dev-libs/softhsm2011-06-02 10:24:30 scarabeus dev-ruby/dnsruby2011-06-02 11:07:54 scarabeus app-vim/command-t 2011-06-02 11:58:10 radhermit net-dns/opendnssec 2011-06-02 12:26:28 scarabeus x11-themes/gnome-icon-theme-symbolic2011-06-02 21:01:46 nirbheek media-libs/grilo2011-06-02 23:42:36 nirbheek media-plugins/grilo-plugins 2011-06-02 23:43:29 nirbheek dev-util/ccglue 2011-06-03 07:06:38 radhermit dev-ruby/rb-inotify 2011-06-03 09:08:58 graaff dev-perl/strictures 2011-06-04 08:09:59 tove dev-perl/Class-Method-Modifiers 2011-06-04 08:10:51 tove dev-perl/Moo2011-06-04 08:12:57 tove dev-util/cmockery 2011-06-04 15:34:18 radhermit dev-php/PEAR-Crypt_Blowfish 2011-06-04 18:57:35 a3li dev-php/PEAR-Net_DNS2 2011-06-04 19:00:09 a3li dev-php/Horde_ActiveSync2011-06-04 19:36:39 a3li dev-php/Horde_Browser 2011-06-04 19:42:20 a3li dev-php/Horde_Cache 2011-06-04 19:42:35 a3li dev-php/Horde_Cli 2011-06-04 19:42:51 a3li dev-php/Horde_Compress 2011-06-04 19:43:08 a3li dev-php/Horde_Constraint2011-06-04 19:43:25 a3li dev-php/Horde_Controller2011-06-04 19:43:41 a3li dev-php/Horde_Core 2011-06-04 19:43:58 a3li dev-php/Horde_Data 2011-06-04 19:44:20 a3li dev-php/Horde_DataTree 2011-06-04 19:44:36 a3li dev-php/Horde_Date 2011-06-04 19:44:52 a3li dev-php/Horde_Date_Parser 2011-06-04 19:45:08 a3li dev-php/Horde_Db2011-06-04 19:45:25 a3li dev-php/Horde_Exception 2011-06-04 19:45:41 a3li dev-php/Horde_Feed 2011-06-04 19:45:57 a3li dev-php/Horde_Form 2011-06-04 19:46:13 a3li dev-php/Horde_Group 2011-06-04 19:46:29 a3li dev-php/Horde_History 2011-06-04 19:46:45 a3li dev-php/Horde_Http 2011-06-04 19:47:01 a3li dev-php/Horde_Icalendar 2011-06-04 19:47:17 a3li dev-php/Horde_Image 2011-06-04 19:47:34 a3li dev-php/Horde_Imap_Client 2011-06-04 19:47:50 a3li dev-php/Horde_Imsp 2011-06-04 19:48:07 a3li dev-php/Horde_Injector 2011-06-04 19:48:24 a3li dev-php/Horde_Itip 2011-06-04 19:48:40 a3li dev-php/Horde_Kolab_Format 2011-06-04 19:48:56 a3li dev-php/Horde_Kolab_Server 2011-06-04 19:49:12 a3li dev-php/Horde_Kolab_Session 2011-06-04 19:49:28 a3li dev-php/Horde_Kolab_Storage 2011-06-04 19:49:44 a3li dev-php/Horde_Ldap 2011-06-04 19:50:00 a3li dev-php/Horde_Lock 2011-06-04 19:50:16 a3li dev-php/Horde_Log 2011-06-04 19:50:32 a3li dev-php/Horde_LoginTasks2011-06-04 19:50:48 a3li dev-php/Horde_Mail 2011-06-04 19:51:04 a3li dev-php/Horde_Mime 2011-06-04 19:51:24 a3li dev-php/Horde_Mime_Viewer 2011-06-04 19:51:40 a3li dev-php/Horde_Nls 2011-06-04 19:51:56 a3li dev-php/Horde_Notification 2011-06-04 19:52:12 a3li dev-php/Horde_Pdf 2011-06-04 19:52:32 a3li dev-php/Horde_Perms 2011-06-04 19:52:48 a3li
Re: [gentoo-dev] MULTI_ABI support addition to main tree portage
On 06/05/2011 04:44 PM, Matt Turner wrote: Have you looked at Tommy[D]'s work? What do you think needs to happen for it to be merged? I haven't looked at the code in detail, but the idea behind it seems reasonable. Given the complexity of the issue, I think that it needs to be approved as a GLEP before it's merged in mainline portage. The GLEP should thoroughly discuss a migration plan that makes the migration process as smooth as possible for our users and our ebuild developers alike. -- Thanks, Zac
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Test request: open-iscsi 2.0.872
On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 13:57:18 +0200 Sebastian Pipping sp...@gentoo.org wrote: PS: I noticed the typo in gentoo-users@lists.g.o ^ and sent a new mail to gentoo-user@lists.g.o now. Sebastian From an grossly incomplete, very quick and rather dirty count of my own darling packages, it looks like I maintain 74 directly, and hundreds as part of a herd/team/project. Would you like me to start sending mail about all of them to the Gentoo Developers Mailing List? In other words, apparently it must be said once in a while that discussing individual packages or exposing information about them on gentoo-dev@ has long been regarded as spam. Maybe you would like that to change, but currently I don't see anyone else sending updates about individual packages, let alone package versions to this list, except when it's about a package that could very well brick your system, like glibc. So maybe your thread should have gone to gentoo-user*@lists.g.o only. jer
