Re: [gentoo-dev] www-servers/lighttpd is up for grabs
I still run lighttpd exclusively on all of my rigs, so this will be a good way for me to get back into the proxy maintainer gig. -- Take care! Herb Miller Jr.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs
On 07/13/2018 10:37 AM, Naohiro Aota wrote: > - media-video/v4l2loopback Definitely have a use for this. Looking into it now.
Re: [gentoo-dev] New Portage fork: sys-apps/portage-mgorny
On 03/22/2018 04:17 PM, James Le Cuirot wrote: > On Thu, 22 Mar 2018 20:03:46 +0100 > Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >> After 2+ years of repeating disagreements with Portage maintainer(s) >> I have finally decided to fork Portage. My little fork uses technical >> name of 'portage[mgorny]' [1] (to distinguish it from mainline Portage), >> and aims to focus on cleaning up code and adding useful features with >> less concern for infinite bug-by-bug compatibility. > I hope you will continue with our efforts to drive regular Portage > forwards too. It's been a long road but also very productive. > > I notice that your fork cannot be installed at the same time as regular > Portage. I think this will really hinder any interest in it. As > Gentoo developers, we obviously have to make sure things work with the > official package manager and that goes for you too. Would it be > possible for them to coexist? I'm not saying I'll try it though, just > making a suggestion. :) > Seems to also be blocked by other management tools such as perl-cleaner and haskell-updater. I'd love to take it for a spin if you have any suggestions on how to navigate the blocks. https://paste.pound-python.org/show/VxWWAGW9PpPCS3L4Q6Z3/ Herb Miller Jr.
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Begin a dev-libs/nodejs category?
On 03/21/2018 03:33 AM, Kent Fredric wrote: > On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 01:44:11 + > Herb Miller Jr. <h...@hlmjr.com> wrote: > >> If I am, then yes, some kind of automation >> would be the only sane way to keep up > In my experience you can't *really* rely on automation 100% for this > sort of thing. Not while achieving quality results. > > Its viable for an overlay where there's no expectations of quality, but > for the main tree, I find you want to have a human san-check everything > and manually vet each upstream version for "anomalous things". > > Automation is good at handling the "known predictable" cases, humans > are better at detecting "huh, that's weird, why did they do that?" > > Because you absolutely want to know if upstream added some stupid > change that is harmful to Gentoo users before you blindly replicate it. And I agree with you 100%. I would never rely on automation exclusively. I would use it to write boilerplate sections, check for updates, check for breakage, etc. I'd never open a PR for something I hadn't polished myself.
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Begin a dev-libs/nodejs category?
On 03/20/2018 07:50 PM, Benda Xu wrote: > Hello Herb, > > "Herb Miller Jr." <gentooh...@gmail.com> writes: > >> When I did my homework on creating nodejs ebuilds (not nodejs itself >> but packages written in node), it seems the topic has come up a few >> times in the past but the time commitment and general disorganization >> of upstream has scared off any serious attempts at packaging. >> >> Seeing as there has been interest in nodejs packages, and in the end >> we could be talking 400-600+ packages, would it be possible to create >> dev-libs/nodejs category? I would be happy to write and proxy-maintain >> ebuilds for a large number of them to get things in motion. I've >> already opened pull request #7427 [1] for chalk and its >> dependencies. I'm aiming to build up to all the dependencies needed >> for Visual Studio Code OSS. >> >> [1]:https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/7427 > Your effort will be much appreciated. I support your plan. > > Should the category be dev-js intead? To me, node.js is but an > implementation of javascript runtime. > > > BTW, for the 400-500 packages, are you going to create them with a > generator script? > > Cheers, > Benda > > Hopefully by the time it gets to that many I won't be the only one creating/maintaining them. If I am, then yes, some kind of automation would be the only sane way to keep up. I figure I'll face that challenge when I get there. As I'm writing them I am seeing a general skeleton forming that most of them fit into. Herb Miller Jr.
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Begin a dev-libs/nodejs category?
On 03/20/2018 02:48 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > On 03/20/2018 07:50 AM, Herb Miller Jr. wrote: >> When I did my homework on creating nodejs ebuilds (not nodejs itself but >> packages written in node), it seems the topic has come up a few times in >> the past but the time commitment and general disorganization of upstream >> has scared off any serious attempts at packaging. > There's a real technical problem hidden in there. Since npm > (recursively!) bundles every dependency, nobody worries about > compatibility in their JS packages. You'll quickly find yourself stuck. > > For example, if you want to package an end-user application "foo", it > might depend on libraries "bar-1.0" and "baz-2.0". But then "bar-1.0" > itself depends on "baz-1.0". What do you do? Slot everything? How do you > make NodeJS look in the right place? You're going to need a plan, > because this situation is not at all uncommon. > That is scary. I hadn't noticed there are node_modules directories under many node modules and that npm list outputs different versions of the same dependency. To help me better understand the situation, when you see this happen does "bar-1.0" normally depend on "baz-1.0" because... A) There is some huge technical hurdle in upgrading to "baz-2.0"? B) I was too lazy or didn't care to upgrade to "baz-2.0"? C) My package.json is outdated? If A, can you point me to a good example I can take a look at? If it's normally B or C, I have no problem making lots of upstream pull requests. It's just Javascript. Though I understand that's not a true solution in the long-run and has burnout written all over it. I'll have to give the problem much more thought. Herb Miller Jr.
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Begin a dev-libs/nodejs category?
Indeed I did. Thank you for pointing that out. It had been a long night. Herb Miller Jr. On 03/20/2018 02:34 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > W dniu wto, 20.03.2018 o godzinie 07∶50 -0400, użytkownik Herb Miller > Jr. napisał: >> When I did my homework on creating nodejs ebuilds (not nodejs itself but >> packages written in node), it seems the topic has come up a few times in >> the past but the time commitment and general disorganization of upstream >> has scared off any serious attempts at packaging. >> >> Seeing as there has been interest in nodejs packages, and in the end we >> could be talking 400-600+ packages, would it be possible to create >> dev-libs/nodejs category? I would be happy to write and proxy-maintain >> ebuilds for a large number of them to get things in motion. I've already >> opened pull request #7427 [1] for chalk and its dependencies. I'm aiming >> to build up to all the dependencies needed for Visual Studio Code OSS. > I think you meant 'dev-nodejs'. > >> [1]:https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/7427 >> >> >> Herb Miller Jr. >>
[gentoo-dev] [RFC] Begin a dev-libs/nodejs category?
When I did my homework on creating nodejs ebuilds (not nodejs itself but packages written in node), it seems the topic has come up a few times in the past but the time commitment and general disorganization of upstream has scared off any serious attempts at packaging. Seeing as there has been interest in nodejs packages, and in the end we could be talking 400-600+ packages, would it be possible to create dev-libs/nodejs category? I would be happy to write and proxy-maintain ebuilds for a large number of them to get things in motion. I've already opened pull request #7427 [1] for chalk and its dependencies. I'm aiming to build up to all the dependencies needed for Visual Studio Code OSS. [1]:https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo/pull/7427 Herb Miller Jr.
