Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc-2.7 stabilization
Hey Mike: Mike Frysinger escribió: some heads up here glibc-2.7 has sat in ~arch for much longer than i would have liked. the only real issue holding it back is nscd. In alpha we still have a bastard called 205099[1]. We need to track down the real problem there and fix it before we can mark 2.7 even ~alpha. Any help from toolchain ninjas is more than welcome. Thanks. [1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=205099 -- Jose Luis Rivero [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/Doc Gentoo/Alpha -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Projects and subproject status
Hi *: Speaking for Gentoo/Alpha Arch Team (ferdy is the lead but I used to be the status report guy): Luca Barbato escribió: Are we fine? I would say: yes. Reasons: - General keywording is just fine. - Security bugs are done in a reasonable period of time. - We have a new and shiny developer machine. - Kernel and toolchain are nearly up to date (some bugs in latest versions, as usual). - Arch Testing program has worked quite well. What are we going to do: - First of all, keep things working (this could sound easy but being an alpha port ... you never knows). - New developer (Tobias) is ready to join the forces. (bug #196948) - First tests to bring java via gcj are done. (http://www.nabble.com/Java-gcj-in-Gentoo-Alpha-to12131495.html) - Look to create a binpkg repo. - Continue the arch testing program and try to recruit fresh blood. Alpha Arch Team provides 'regular' status report so historical info about the port status can be found in our subproject page: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/base/alpha/status/index.xml That's all from the alpha world. Enjoy. -- Jose Luis Rivero [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/Doc Gentoo/Alpha -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] New USE flags documentation
Jose Luis Rivero wrote: I'm not asking for an extra overhead of 'bureaucracy' (write specs, mailling @dev, send to the council, etc.) but a bit more of communication would be appreciated: Seems like everyone who contact me/us about this thread is agree about the needed of write a GLEP before doing this kind of global changes. So I would like to add a couple of considerations: 1. Dear gentoo devs, in the future, please, write a GLEP for global changes affecting all of us and post them to -dev. This way you can get some feedback, improve the original idea and inform everybody about the new feature (all-in-one). 2. With respect to the new metadata USE flag implementation, I think that reverting the changes could be quite radical so my vote goes for: leave the thingy as it (stop adding use flags to metadata for now), write a quick GLEP and go through the process. When it's done, migrate the current data (if needed) and enjoy. Thanks. -- Jose Luis Rivero [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/Doc Gentoo/Alpha -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] On my way out....
Gustavo Zacarias escribió: I resign as gentoo developer. Infra: please remove my accounts. oooH shit! gustavoz was probably one of our best developers and also a friend. Gustavoz is hard to see you go. Since I arrived to Gentoo, the sparc team was always a model for all of us working in the arch teams business and a very good example of high QA. I can't imaging the end of the sparc port, so now that things go quite well for Alpha I propobably can provide some help.I'm quite far of being a sparc expert but I have some experience during the last two years working for Gentoo/Alpha. I will mail [EMAIL PROTECTED] and see how can I be useful. P.D: this is just to wait the return of gustavoz (or Weeve) to Gentoo, which will happen sooner or later. I'm sure. -- Jose Luis Rivero [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/Doc Gentoo/Alpha -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
[gentoo-dev] Friendly reminder. Take care of your keywords
Hi *: This is a friendly reminder for all the people who work in the arch teams and make the keywording process. All of us know that the keyword process is hard and sometimes not very funny but it should be done with special care because is the final test between the software and the users/devs community out there. Lately we have some tools that save us to access to the bugzilla web interface to make comments or modify bugzie fields. Please, if you are going to use them, be sure of read all the comments in the stabilization bugs before because sometimes there are things to fix or important comments that can make the process to stop. We can't mark something even ~arch if there are compilation errors (reached via USE flags or not) or you found deficiencies in the use of the software until the maintainer can help us to know how to fix them or use the app properly. Arch teams are usually the last layer of QA so, please, take care of your arch, take care of your users, take care of Gentoo. Anyway, you know I love you all. P.D: please, if you don't have anything positive to say or add something of value to this thread, keep it out of the list. Thanks. -- Jose Luis Rivero [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/Doc Gentoo/Alpha -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-2 stablisation plans
Roy Marples escribió: On Mon, 2007-07-23 at 13:30 -0700, Chris Gianelloni wrote: We'll definitely want the same version stable across the board. I'll be sure to work with Roy and you to ensure we come to an agreement on what to use and that we're all on the same page. Fair enough. Should I open a bug (when the time comes) just requesting the blessing of the arch teams or just unmask it anyway? Note that the following arch's have been tested by people other than me amd64 arm ppc ppc64 sparc (fbsd only i think so far) x86 In alpha is under testing by Tobias Klausman (B|ackbird) but, a part from the net.eth0 lost link issue, seems to be sane AFAIK. We will be ready very soon. Thanks. -- Jose Luis Rivero [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/Doc Gentoo/Alpha -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Nominations open for the Gentoo Council 2007/08
Hi all: Torsten Veller escribió: Let me paste last year's mail: | well it's about that time of the year ... time for nominating people | for the next Gentoo Council | | for the quick low down: | - nominations are from July 1 through July 31 | - anyone can nominate | - only Gentoo devs may be nominated | | so get with the nominating people ! | | for the full details, check out the Council homepage: | http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/#doc_chap6 I've just rescued the xml we used the last year and update the current nominations. The list is in: http://dev.gentoo.org/~yoswink/council-2007.xml I will try to update it often, but please, tell me if I miss something or if there is some error. Thanks. -- Jose Luis Rivero [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/Doc Gentoo/Alpha -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for May
Roy Marples wrote: I maintain and play a game called Eternal Lands. I'm a Council member, but not part of the games team/herd. One of the problems games have with stable/unstable/testing/whatever keywords is that upstream changes things that in any other application just would not change. For example, the network protocol when talking to servers. EL is very version specific and when a new client is launched, around once every 6 months they change over right away. That means our users need the game right away. Thanks for the example, trust me if I tell you that we can understand the situation pretty well. I used to commit EL straight to stable for this very reason, but now after a few Gentoo QA people bitched EL will never ever have a stable keyword. I'm nearly sure that you always (at least) compile and run the new version in your box before you sent it to stable, didn't you? So, at least, you are able to say that it works in your case. So instead I periodically have to let our users know how to unmask EL just so they can play their game. There are always ways to educate users about how to use portage properly. So no, in many cases NOT committing straight to stable CAN be detrimental to our users if all they want is a games machine. You could argue that they shouldn't be using Gentoo, but I would argue why should we discriminate? Ehm, IMHO call it discriminate is a big hard. Are the gnome-2.18 or beryl users discriminated or they should be using something different to Gentoo? They only thing people have to do is use some ~arch branch packages, which isn't too difficult (in Gentoo). This is how I see it: Problem with keywording straight to stable is that arch teams are very zealous about our stable branch. We put a lot of time trying things to not fail in stable, and if an app is broken, we prefer to not force the users to compile and install another broken (or unknown to be broken) version and work to fix the current stable (patches or bumping) together with the maintainer. But if you send things, that you can't try, to stable, the qa baby jesus will cry if it fails, because nobody has taken care of even compile it in the arch :) Games are not part of core system, so IMHO, use the ~arch branch to have the latest cool version to enjoy, could be a good way to go for those el1te gam3rs. Thanks. -- Jose Luis Rivero [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/Doc Gentoo/Alpha -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for May
Roy Marples escribió: On Thu, 03 May 2007 12:15:45 +0200 José Luis Rivero (yoswink) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ehm, IMHO call it discriminate is a big hard. Are the gnome-2.18 or beryl users discriminated or they should be using something different to Gentoo? They only thing people have to do is use some ~arch branch packages, which isn't too difficult (in Gentoo). No no no. In my example we can only use one version of the game with the upstream servers. There is only 1 upstream server, we have to use it. Excuse me, Roy. I didn't get the point. Only one upstream server seems to make things much stricter and sounds quite reasonable to me the both ways you have used to handle it. IMHO, this is a good case where I'm sure arch teams could be happy to make an exception to the general rule. BTW, I think this is completely different to the situation being discussed. Thanks. -- Jose Luis Rivero [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/Doc Gentoo/Alpha -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] {Guide,Project,Foo}XML too confusing for many devs?
Alec Warner escribió: So this is getting pretty long winded; my basic question is do you as a developer find writing web pages to be confusing or difficult? Is there not a good tutorial for learning our webpage XML syntax? Do you find that you bump up against restrictions in the DTD or other problems that prevent you from expressing yourself properly? Do you have any idea how to actually go about extending GuideXML (or the other XML's we provide) Have you ever tried? Could we improve training with regards to any of this? Alec, as an alternative and if you don't want to waste your time fighting with guideXML or learning how to use it, feel free to send a request with data in plain text (and commenting the restrictions you found) to gentoo-doc list and maybe you'll find a volunteer who can create the page for you. I'm quite sure that somebody from docs-team (user or dev) will help you but, if nobody appears, I will do it. Once you've created the page, maintain it is quite easy. Regards. -- Jose Luis Rivero [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/Doc Gentoo/Alpha -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] {Guide,Project,Foo}XML too confusing for many devs?
Jakub Moc escribió: [snip] Err, where the heck has gone the GuideXML editor project that was part of last SoC? Its name is 'beacon' [1] and is developed by our dev Anant Narayanan who probably can give you more info about it. [1] http://code.kix.in/projects/beacon/ -- Jose Luis Rivero [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo/Doc Gentoo/Alpha -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
