Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
On 06/03/2013 08:07, Maxim Koltsov wrote: 1) Do you agree with adding new category? Not really... are you going to add any more packages? -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
2013/3/6 Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu: On 06/03/2013 08:07, Maxim Koltsov wrote: 1) Do you agree with adding new category? Not really... are you going to add any more packages? Yes, definitely. -- Georg Rudoy LeechCraft — http://leechcraft.org
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
2013/3/6 Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu On 06/03/2013 08:07, Maxim Koltsov wrote: 1) Do you agree with adding new category? Not really... are you going to add any more packages? It's very probable, yes. Also I think 60 packages is quite big number, as we have many categories with 20 or even less packages. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
On 06/03/2013 10:15, Maxim Koltsov wrote: It's very probable, yes. Also I think 60 packages is quite big number, as we have many categories with 20 or even less packages. The fact that we made mistakes in the past does not justify making more mistakes. How many more are you expecting? (and the answer many! is not going to fly, if anything would make me more convinced we shouldn't do this). -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Maxim Koltsov maksbo...@gentoo.org wrote: Not really... are you going to add any more packages? It's very probable, yes. Also I think 60 packages is quite big number, as we have many categories with 20 or even less packages. It's not *just* the number of packages. I, for one, had never even heard of it except via your email to this list. And having looked at the site, I don't really see why people would want to use it, anyway. Not that you have to explain it, but that leads me to wonder if (a) there are other Gentoo devs who would maintain this stuff if you become disinterested, and (b) how many users there even are for LeechCraft-related packages. FWIW, in Debian's popcon, there seems to be about 6 users who have LeechCraft installed (which ranks it slightly south of 70,000th). Cheers, Dirkjan
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
2013/3/6 Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu: How many more are you expecting? Six components are ready to be packaged in the nearest future, four are being developed, and there are plans for, well, like a dozen more. Also, keeping stuff in one category allows splitting several huge ebuilds like leechcraft-azoth into more smaller ones. Each use flag there is basically a separate plugin, and as plugins could be built separately, there is no need in recompiling all of them just to install/uninstall/etc a single one. That single azoth thingie adds around 30 more packages. -- Georg Rudoy LeechCraft — http://leechcraft.org
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
On 6 March 2013 15:07, Maxim Koltsov maksbo...@gentoo.org wrote: Hi, Currently there are 61 leechcraft packages in tree scattered across several categories. We propose to move them to one new category to make maintaining easy as well as rsync --exclude'ing. So, two questions: 1) Do you agree with adding new category? I don't see why not. 2) How should we call it: app-leechcraft, leechcraft-base or anything else? Yes, something like that. -- Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
On Wednesday 06 March 2013 10:33:58 Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: The fact that we made mistakes in the past does not justify making more mistakes. Um, what are you talking about, too many categories? I am afraid, there is no fix in the form of lets not add any. Every commits summary message has at least 3x more added packages vs removed ones. This stuff has to go somewhere and some categories are becoming way overfilled I'd say. At the same time I do agree that the present flat list of super-sub categories is not scaling well either (OTOH it is still nicer than some of the 200+ large categories of present). May be it is time to scratch the flat list of categories and finally go into a full tree mode? I.e.: app-* = app/accessibility /admin etc, and subdivide where necessary? (e.g. app/admin/eselect/ would be just one such beneficiary). Just a thought..
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
2013/3/6 Dirkjan Ochtman d...@gentoo.org: On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Maxim Koltsov maksbo...@gentoo.org wrote: Not that you have to explain it, but that leads me to wonder if (a) there are other Gentoo devs who would maintain this stuff if you become disinterested Yep, Pinkbyte is also co-maintaining, and in case of something terrible I could try becoming a maintainer, since I'm also a long-time Gentoo user :) (b) how many users there even are for LeechCraft-related packages. Summer estimates are around 10k more or less permanent users. FWIW, in Debian's popcon, there seems to be about 6 users who have LeechCraft installed (which ranks it slightly south of 70,000th). Debian's popcon is slightly irrelevant as LC isn't available in Debian repos. -- Georg Rudoy LeechCraft — http://leechcraft.org
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
On 06/03/2013 13:04, George Shapovalov wrote: I am afraid, there is no fix in the form of lets not add any. Every commits summary message has at least 3x more added packages vs removed ones. I'm just saying that I wouldn't want to create a category for ten packages. If we're talking ~100 I'm fine with it. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
On Wed, Mar 6, 2013 at 9:06 AM, Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu wrote: I'm just saying that I wouldn't want to create a category for ten packages. If we're talking ~100 I'm fine with it. Can't say I'm likely to be a leechcraft user, but the original proposal indicated they were up to 60 now, and had at least 10-20 more in the works. I don't think a category is unreasonable, and if at some point in time popularity wanes and it needs treecleaning it makes the whole task that much easier... Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
On 06/03/2013 15:23, Rich Freeman wrote: Can't say I'm likely to be a leechcraft user, but the original proposal indicated they were up to 60 now, and had at least 10-20 more in the works. I don't think a category is unreasonable, and if at some point in time popularity wanes and it needs treecleaning it makes the whole task that much easier... I would have said no for 61 (as I would have expected them to wane, as you said) — for 100 I'm fine, if that's happening. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
2013/3/6 Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu: On 06/03/2013 15:23, Rich Freeman wrote: Can't say I'm likely to be a leechcraft user, but the original proposal indicated they were up to 60 now, and had at least 10-20 more in the works. I don't think a category is unreasonable, and if at some point in time popularity wanes and it needs treecleaning it makes the whole task that much easier... I would have said no for 61 (as I would have expected them to wane, as you said) — for 100 I'm fine, if that's happening. So, what have we decided? I'm pretty sure it'll go up to 100 quite soon. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
On 6 March 2013 15:12, Maxim Koltsov maksbo...@gentoo.org wrote: 2013/3/6 Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu: On 06/03/2013 15:23, Rich Freeman wrote: Can't say I'm likely to be a leechcraft user, but the original proposal indicated they were up to 60 now, and had at least 10-20 more in the works. I don't think a category is unreasonable, and if at some point in time popularity wanes and it needs treecleaning it makes the whole task that much easier... I would have said no for 61 (as I would have expected them to wane, as you said) — for 100 I'm fine, if that's happening. So, what have we decided? I'm pretty sure it'll go up to 100 quite soon. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ I have no problem with the new category. We recently created a new category for the Qt packages which has around 20 packages in it, so I am not sure why Diego wants more than 100 packages for the new category. -- Regards, Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
On 06/03/2013 16:19, Markos Chandras wrote: I have no problem with the new category. We recently created a new category for the Qt packages which has around 20 packages in it, so I am not sure why Diego wants more than 100 packages for the new category. I wasn't too happy about that either, if you remember. -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
On 06/03/2013 16:12, Maxim Koltsov wrote: So, what have we decided? I'm pretty sure it'll go up to 100 quite soon. Then go for it. I'd suggest just app-leechcraft -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
2013/3/6 Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu: On 06/03/2013 16:12, Maxim Koltsov wrote: So, what have we decided? I'm pretty sure it'll go up to 100 quite soon. Then go for it. I'd suggest just app-leechcraft Thanks. Do i have to do anything more that add it to profiles/categories and mkdir? -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ -- Regards, Maxim.
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
On Wed, 6 Mar 2013 20:05:51 +0400 Maxim Koltsov maksbo...@gentoo.org wrote: 2013/3/6 Diego Elio Pettenò flamee...@flameeyes.eu: On 06/03/2013 16:12, Maxim Koltsov wrote: So, what have we decided? I'm pretty sure it'll go up to 100 quite soon. Then go for it. I'd suggest just app-leechcraft Thanks. Do i have to do anything more that add it to profiles/categories and mkdir? -- Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes flamee...@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/ No, just make sure it is a separate commit according to http://devmanual.gentoo.org/profiles/categories/index.html. As for moving packages, don't forget to do this as well: Grep the entire Portage tree to correct files that block / depend on it, correct profile files that list it and also specify `move oldcat/oldpkg newcat/newpkg` instructions in the profiles/updates directory according to http://devmanual.gentoo.org/profiles/updates/index.html. With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New category for LeechCraft
2013/3/6 Maxim Koltsov maksbo...@gentoo.org: 1) Do you agree with adding new category? Yep :) 2) How should we call it: app-leechcraft, leechcraft-base or anything else? Personally I'd prefer app-leechcraft (or maybe app-lc to save some typing). I doubt there will be anything but that single category in the foreseeable future, and leechcraft-base suggests also something like leechcraft-addons. -- Georg Rudoy LeechCraft — http://leechcraft.org
