Re: [gentoo-dev] games-emulation/jgemu keywording request
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 21:40:27 +0100 Sam James wrote: > orbea writes: > > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 16:21:43 -0400 > > Mike Gilbert wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 4:11 PM orbea wrote: > >> > > >> > On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 20:38:48 +0100 > >> > Sam James wrote: > >> > > >> > > orbea writes: > >> > > > >> > > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 19:18:45 +0100 > >> > > > Sam James wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > >> orbea writes: > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Several months ago I made this issue for keywording the > >> > > >> > games-emulation/jgemu meta package which is a collection > >> > > >> > of minimal emulators for the command-line > >> > > >> > games-emulation/jgrf frontend with a focus on accuracy. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > >> You've not populated the package list and no arches are > >> > > >> CC'd, but we don't keyword things for no reason either on > >> > > >> (very) niche arches. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> Please select a reasonable set of architectures. > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/891201 > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > > > >> > > > Apologies, I wasn't aware I needed to do that and in > >> > > > retrospect I should of thought of it. Just to be clear you > >> > > > mean add an issue for each issue and then use them as > >> > > > blockers for the games-emulation/jgemu issue? > >> > > > >> > > No, one bug is okay if you populate the package list field in > >> > > Bugzilla. > >> > > > >> > > Just keep in mind that keywording isn't the same as upstreaam > >> > > CI either and we generally want to only keyword on arches where > >> > > someone is likely to use it. > >> > > > >> > > >> > Apologies, I now understand what you meant... > >> > > >> > The goal is to hopefully entice real world testers on systems > >> > that jgemu may be used. This is not something a CI would be able > >> > to accomplish. > >> > >> This is not an appropriate use of Gentoo arch testing. We keyword > >> things based on user demand, not to satisfy the urges of upstream > >> developers. > >> > > > > Its a common occurrence that upstreams refuse to consider distros > > and leave them hanging, but I honestly did not expect the inverse > > where the distro is unwilling while the upstream is > > That doesn't mean we're able to start acting as CI. We already have > enough test failures and build failures to handle for packages > where people want to use them on alt-arches. > The goal was to expose these issues so that people can use them, but if no one is at all interested then close the issue.
Re: [gentoo-dev] games-emulation/jgemu keywording request
11.09.2023 21:31, orbea пишет: On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 16:21:43 -0400 Mike Gilbert wrote: On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 4:11 PM orbea wrote: On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 20:38:48 +0100 Sam James wrote: orbea writes: On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 19:18:45 +0100 Sam James wrote: orbea writes: Hi, Several months ago I made this issue for keywording the games-emulation/jgemu meta package which is a collection of minimal emulators for the command-line games-emulation/jgrf frontend with a focus on accuracy. You've not populated the package list and no arches are CC'd, but we don't keyword things for no reason either on (very) niche arches. Please select a reasonable set of architectures. https://bugs.gentoo.org/891201 Apologies, I wasn't aware I needed to do that and in retrospect I should of thought of it. Just to be clear you mean add an issue for each issue and then use them as blockers for the games-emulation/jgemu issue? No, one bug is okay if you populate the package list field in Bugzilla. Just keep in mind that keywording isn't the same as upstreaam CI either and we generally want to only keyword on arches where someone is likely to use it. Apologies, I now understand what you meant... The goal is to hopefully entice real world testers on systems that jgemu may be used. This is not something a CI would be able to accomplish. This is not an appropriate use of Gentoo arch testing. We keyword things based on user demand, not to satisfy the urges of upstream developers. Its a common occurrence that upstreams refuse to consider distros and leave them hanging, but I honestly did not expect the inverse where the distro is unwilling while the upstream is End users are already able to attempt building any package on any architecture by adding that package and its deps to /etc/portage/package.accept_keywords as ** Users who wish to contribute as CI to jgemu can do so already. Users who do not wish, won't do that even with the keyword. -- Best regards, Alexey "DarthGandalf" Sokolov
Re: [gentoo-dev] games-emulation/jgemu keywording request
orbea writes: > On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 16:21:43 -0400 > Mike Gilbert wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 4:11 PM orbea wrote: >> > >> > On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 20:38:48 +0100 >> > Sam James wrote: >> > >> > > orbea writes: >> > > >> > > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 19:18:45 +0100 >> > > > Sam James wrote: >> > > > >> > > >> orbea writes: >> > > >> >> > > >> > Hi, >> > > >> > >> > > >> > Several months ago I made this issue for keywording the >> > > >> > games-emulation/jgemu meta package which is a collection of >> > > >> > minimal emulators for the command-line games-emulation/jgrf >> > > >> > frontend with a focus on accuracy. >> > > >> > >> > > >> >> > > >> You've not populated the package list and no arches are CC'd, >> > > >> but we don't keyword things for no reason either on (very) >> > > >> niche arches. >> > > >> >> > > >> Please select a reasonable set of architectures. >> > > >> >> > > >> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/891201 >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > > >> > > > Apologies, I wasn't aware I needed to do that and in retrospect >> > > > I should of thought of it. Just to be clear you mean add an >> > > > issue for each issue and then use them as blockers for the >> > > > games-emulation/jgemu issue? >> > > >> > > No, one bug is okay if you populate the package list field in >> > > Bugzilla. >> > > >> > > Just keep in mind that keywording isn't the same as upstreaam CI >> > > either and we generally want to only keyword on arches where >> > > someone is likely to use it. >> > > >> > >> > Apologies, I now understand what you meant... >> > >> > The goal is to hopefully entice real world testers on systems that >> > jgemu may be used. This is not something a CI would be able to >> > accomplish. >> >> This is not an appropriate use of Gentoo arch testing. We keyword >> things based on user demand, not to satisfy the urges of upstream >> developers. >> > > Its a common occurrence that upstreams refuse to consider distros and > leave them hanging, but I honestly did not expect the inverse where the > distro is unwilling while the upstream is That doesn't mean we're able to start acting as CI. We already have enough test failures and build failures to handle for packages where people want to use them on alt-arches.
Re: [gentoo-dev] games-emulation/jgemu keywording request
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 16:21:43 -0400 Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 4:11 PM orbea wrote: > > > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 20:38:48 +0100 > > Sam James wrote: > > > > > orbea writes: > > > > > > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 19:18:45 +0100 > > > > Sam James wrote: > > > > > > > >> orbea writes: > > > >> > > > >> > Hi, > > > >> > > > > >> > Several months ago I made this issue for keywording the > > > >> > games-emulation/jgemu meta package which is a collection of > > > >> > minimal emulators for the command-line games-emulation/jgrf > > > >> > frontend with a focus on accuracy. > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> You've not populated the package list and no arches are CC'd, > > > >> but we don't keyword things for no reason either on (very) > > > >> niche arches. > > > >> > > > >> Please select a reasonable set of architectures. > > > >> > > > >> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/891201 > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > > > > Apologies, I wasn't aware I needed to do that and in retrospect > > > > I should of thought of it. Just to be clear you mean add an > > > > issue for each issue and then use them as blockers for the > > > > games-emulation/jgemu issue? > > > > > > No, one bug is okay if you populate the package list field in > > > Bugzilla. > > > > > > Just keep in mind that keywording isn't the same as upstreaam CI > > > either and we generally want to only keyword on arches where > > > someone is likely to use it. > > > > > > > Apologies, I now understand what you meant... > > > > The goal is to hopefully entice real world testers on systems that > > jgemu may be used. This is not something a CI would be able to > > accomplish. > > This is not an appropriate use of Gentoo arch testing. We keyword > things based on user demand, not to satisfy the urges of upstream > developers. > Its a common occurrence that upstreams refuse to consider distros and leave them hanging, but I honestly did not expect the inverse where the distro is unwilling while the upstream is
Re: [gentoo-dev] games-emulation/jgemu keywording request
On Mon, Sep 11, 2023 at 4:11 PM orbea wrote: > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 20:38:48 +0100 > Sam James wrote: > > > orbea writes: > > > > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 19:18:45 +0100 > > > Sam James wrote: > > > > > >> orbea writes: > > >> > > >> > Hi, > > >> > > > >> > Several months ago I made this issue for keywording the > > >> > games-emulation/jgemu meta package which is a collection of > > >> > minimal emulators for the command-line games-emulation/jgrf > > >> > frontend with a focus on accuracy. > > >> > > > >> > > >> You've not populated the package list and no arches are CC'd, but > > >> we don't keyword things for no reason either on (very) niche > > >> arches. > > >> > > >> Please select a reasonable set of architectures. > > >> > > >> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/891201 > > >> > > >> > > > > > > Apologies, I wasn't aware I needed to do that and in retrospect I > > > should of thought of it. Just to be clear you mean add an issue for > > > each issue and then use them as blockers for the > > > games-emulation/jgemu issue? > > > > No, one bug is okay if you populate the package list field in > > Bugzilla. > > > > Just keep in mind that keywording isn't the same as upstreaam CI > > either and we generally want to only keyword on arches where someone > > is likely to use it. > > > > Apologies, I now understand what you meant... > > The goal is to hopefully entice real world testers on systems that > jgemu may be used. This is not something a CI would be able to > accomplish. This is not an appropriate use of Gentoo arch testing. We keyword things based on user demand, not to satisfy the urges of upstream developers.
Re: [gentoo-dev] games-emulation/jgemu keywording request
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 20:38:48 +0100 Sam James wrote: > orbea writes: > > > On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 19:18:45 +0100 > > Sam James wrote: > > > >> orbea writes: > >> > >> > Hi, > >> > > >> > Several months ago I made this issue for keywording the > >> > games-emulation/jgemu meta package which is a collection of > >> > minimal emulators for the command-line games-emulation/jgrf > >> > frontend with a focus on accuracy. > >> > > >> > >> You've not populated the package list and no arches are CC'd, but > >> we don't keyword things for no reason either on (very) niche > >> arches. > >> > >> Please select a reasonable set of architectures. > >> > >> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/891201 > >> > >> > > > > Apologies, I wasn't aware I needed to do that and in retrospect I > > should of thought of it. Just to be clear you mean add an issue for > > each issue and then use them as blockers for the > > games-emulation/jgemu issue? > > No, one bug is okay if you populate the package list field in > Bugzilla. > > Just keep in mind that keywording isn't the same as upstreaam CI > either and we generally want to only keyword on arches where someone > is likely to use it. > Apologies, I now understand what you meant... The goal is to hopefully entice real world testers on systems that jgemu may be used. This is not something a CI would be able to accomplish. Do I want independent issues for the dependencies?
Re: [gentoo-dev] games-emulation/jgemu keywording request
orbea writes: > On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 19:18:45 +0100 > Sam James wrote: > >> orbea writes: >> >> > Hi, >> > >> > Several months ago I made this issue for keywording the >> > games-emulation/jgemu meta package which is a collection of minimal >> > emulators for the command-line games-emulation/jgrf frontend with a >> > focus on accuracy. >> > >> >> You've not populated the package list and no arches are CC'd, but we >> don't keyword things for no reason either on (very) niche arches. >> >> Please select a reasonable set of architectures. >> >> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/891201 >> >> > > Apologies, I wasn't aware I needed to do that and in retrospect I > should of thought of it. Just to be clear you mean add an issue for > each issue and then use them as blockers for the games-emulation/jgemu > issue? No, one bug is okay if you populate the package list field in Bugzilla. Just keep in mind that keywording isn't the same as upstreaam CI either and we generally want to only keyword on arches where someone is likely to use it.
Re: [gentoo-dev] games-emulation/jgemu keywording request
On Mon, 11 Sep 2023 19:18:45 +0100 Sam James wrote: > orbea writes: > > > Hi, > > > > Several months ago I made this issue for keywording the > > games-emulation/jgemu meta package which is a collection of minimal > > emulators for the command-line games-emulation/jgrf frontend with a > > focus on accuracy. > > > > You've not populated the package list and no arches are CC'd, but we > don't keyword things for no reason either on (very) niche arches. > > Please select a reasonable set of architectures. > > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/891201 > > Apologies, I wasn't aware I needed to do that and in retrospect I should of thought of it. Just to be clear you mean add an issue for each issue and then use them as blockers for the games-emulation/jgemu issue?
Re: [gentoo-dev] games-emulation/jgemu keywording request
orbea writes: > Hi, > > Several months ago I made this issue for keywording the > games-emulation/jgemu meta package which is a collection of minimal > emulators for the command-line games-emulation/jgrf frontend with a > focus on accuracy. > You've not populated the package list and no arches are CC'd, but we don't keyword things for no reason either on (very) niche arches. Please select a reasonable set of architectures. > https://bugs.gentoo.org/891201
