This is your one-day friendly reminder ! The monthly Gentoo Council
meeting is tomorrow in #gentoo-council on irc.freenode.net. See the
channel topic for the exact time (but it's probably 2000 UTC).
If you're supposed to show up, please show up. If you're not supposed
to show up, then show up
On 07-01-2008 22:31:54 +0100, Luca Barbato wrote:
Here is a list of interesting questions: Are we fine? What are we
going to do?
GNUstep
Are we fine?
I'd say thanks to voyageur (much kudos to the guy) GNUstep is back where
it should be within Gentoo and up-to-date. Eclass changes, package
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 15:26:04 +0100, Rémi Cardona [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pierre-Yves Rofes a écrit :
On Tue, January 8, 2008 1:29 pm, Denis Dupeyron wrote:
So please give a warm welcome to Jean-Noël as a new Gentoo developer.
Yay for the french conspiracy growing yet again :)
We'll have
Luca Barbato kirjoitti:
Please project leaders try to reply in short.
Recruiters
About the stuff I'm involved:
Are we fine?
If Calchan agrees, we are fine.
What are we going to do:
Keep going as usual.
Regards,
Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
On Jan 9, 2008 1:12 PM, Petteri Räty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Recruiters
About the stuff I'm involved:
Are we fine?
If Calchan agrees, we are fine.
I'm taking care of recruits as fast as I can. I figure any time I
spend for the recruiters project is worth a lot more than the same
time
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 22:31:54 +0100
Luca Barbato [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here is a list of interesting questions: Are we fine? What are we
going to do?
Please project leaders try to reply in short.
xfce (has no lead, it's angelos, welp or me) - we are good, few ~minor
bugs, everything up to
On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 15:37:47 +0100
Christian Faulhammer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Christian Faulhammer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
A quick check [...]
Hereby you have proven that you are not interested about
real arguments...some people have tried to gather facts and you pick
those that maybe have
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 04:11:58 +0100
Matthias Langer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Really, this discussion is completely pointless unless some mips
users/developers join in - or aren't there any at all?
I'd imagine most of them are staying well clear of it because they've
already seen this discussion
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:59:29 -0800
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The issue that was raised is that certain arch teams are incapable of
keeping up with the minimal workload they already have and what should
be done about it.
The issue was raised, with absolutely no proof or
Why taking it against arch teams? How is that different from certain
maintainer not taking care of a bug that holds stabilization of certain
package by some time measured in months ? I'll tell you my answer: 'no
difference at all'.
You are right, there's not much difference. However, I
On 1/8/08, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 18:44:22 -0800
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Uh... So where do the original problems come from? Are you saying
that packages mysteriously start breaking on their own because
no-one's maintaining them?
Of
On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 06:58:40 -0800
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think the argument here is that developers control ebuilds. If a
given ebuild is causing 'trouble' for a maintainer it is within their
control to remove the ebuild. Just as if a given package is causing
the maintainer
Hi,
CCing gentoo-lisp mailing list.
Luca Barbato [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Please project leaders try to reply in short.
Though Emacs project (subproject of Lisp) has no official leader, I
speak up as senior dev. :)
Are we fine?
XEmacs:
I cannot tell much, but graaff seems to have closed most
Hi,
Christian Faulhammer [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
A quick check [...]
Hereby you have proven that you are not interested about
real arguments...some people have tried to gather facts and you pick
those that maybe have a weak reasoning or come from people you know how
to upset. Congratulations.
For the ppc64 project
Are we fine?
- The induction of the PS3 has helped us a lot. We have more users than
before. Great variance skill-wise amongst those users but interest
level is high. We need more folks on the dev team but otherwise we're
as healthy as we've ever been.
- Just put
On Wed, Jan 09, 2008 at 09:25:11AM -0500, Caleb Tennis wrote:
Why taking it against arch teams? How is that different from
certain maintainer not taking care of a bug that holds
stabilization of certain package by some time measured in months ?
I'll tell you my answer: 'no difference at
I'd imagine most of them are staying well clear of it because they've
already seen this discussion a dozen times before and know that it's
just the usual malcontents going around making largely bogus claims and
backing them up with lots of thinly veiled mips bashing rather than
anything
The issue was raised, with absolutely no proof or justification, and
every previous time said issue has been raised it's turned out to be
somewhere between highly misleading and utter bollocks.
Let's assume that you are right, and that dropping keywords is not a proper
thing to
do.
What's
On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 10:36:13 -0500 (EST)
Caleb Tennis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The issue was raised, with absolutely no proof or justification, and
every previous time said issue has been raised it's turned out to be
somewhere between highly misleading and utter bollocks.
Let's assume that
- KDE 3 KDE 4
- KDE-related stuff
Are we fine?
All in all, we're doing acceptably well, I'd say. In some areas, we're
doing really well.
I've recently mentored two new recruits, namely Ingmar Ingmar
Vanhassel and Bo zlin Andresen who will hopefully soon become new
members of the KDE
Ferris McCormick wrote:
With all due respect, for some reason we don't have Proctors
anymore to enforce the CoC. Thus, things we would expect the
proctors to catch and handle under CoC get sent to devrel
instead. All I am doing is wondering out loud (now that CoC
is coming alive again)
I wanted to take this thread in a slightly different direction so that
the council has a little more to work with tomorrow. Obviously there
are multiple opinions on whether a problem currently exists - and the
council will need to decide on this. If no problem currently exists
they will
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 17:49:40 +0100
Wulf C. Krueger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's the proper fix for when keyword requests stagnate in
bugzilla?
That depends upon whether the keyword request is important.
Let's take a real world example: KDE 3.5.5 is old, buggy and has
some important
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 17:01 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
3.5.5 was good enough to be keyworded stable at one point. Thus, it
can't be *that* bad.
So what happens if a flaw is discovered in KDE 3.5.5 that allows root
access?
In your world you allow mips users to trivially install now flawed
On 1/9/08, Ciaran McCreesh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 17:49:40 +0100
Wulf C. Krueger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's the proper fix for when keyword requests stagnate in
bugzilla?
That depends upon whether the keyword request is important.
Let's take a real world
On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 10:07:31 -0800
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually if they dump kde-3.5.5 and anything depending on it, then
they don't break the tree and everyone is happy, no?
Everyone except the users, who end up with pages and pages of horrible
Portage output...
--
Ciaran
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 17:27:52 +
Roy Marples [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 17:01 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
3.5.5 was good enough to be keyworded stable at one point. Thus, it
can't be *that* bad.
So what happens if a flaw is discovered in KDE 3.5.5 that allows root
On Wednesday, 09. January 2008 19:16:24 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
So what happens if a flaw is discovered in KDE 3.5.5 that allows root
access?
Then the one particular part of 3.5.5 that's affected gets fixed and
priority keyworded.
So you suggest that mips keeps doing nothing and expect
On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 19:29:53 +0100
Wulf C. Krueger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday, 09. January 2008 19:16:24 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
So what happens if a flaw is discovered in KDE 3.5.5 that allows
root access?
Then the one particular part of 3.5.5 that's affected gets fixed and
First off to get the apology out of the way. Me being a user of both
seahorse and gnupg, I wasn't fully aware of the mess going on in between
the two. So in that regard I do apologize to Alon Bar-Lev ( alonbl ).
Things are not so cut and dry, and I could see where one might have the
need for
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 20:50:38 +0200
Petteri Räty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So you just ignore for example my post about CIA activity for the
mips team?
That falls into the highly misleading category.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
Ciaran McCreesh kirjoitti:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:59:29 -0800
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The issue that was raised is that certain arch teams are incapable of
keeping up with the minimal workload they already have and what should
be done about it.
The issue was raised, with
On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 20:06:00 +0100
Wulf C. Krueger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday, 09. January 2008 19:45:38 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Then the one particular part of 3.5.5 that's affected gets fixed
and priority keyworded.
So you suggest that mips keeps doing nothing and expect
On Wednesday 09 January 2008 18:16:24 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 17:27:52 +
Roy Marples [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 17:01 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
3.5.5 was good enough to be keyworded stable at one point. Thus, it
can't be *that* bad.
So
On Wednesday, 09. January 2008 19:45:38 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Then the one particular part of 3.5.5 that's affected gets fixed
and priority keyworded.
So you suggest that mips keeps doing nothing and expect others to
work *more* in exchange for that?
Well, most users will simply ignore
Petteri Räty wrote:
- Get the remaining Generation 1 stuff out of the tree (not much left)
- Start using virtuals more
- Eclass cleanup and new make our setup even more automatic
any plan/idea about icedtea? as a ppc user I'd love too see it in
portage ^^;
lu
--
Luca Barbato
Gentoo
Ferris McCormick wrote:
With all due respect, for some reason we don't have Proctors anymore to
enforce
the CoC.
The perception is that they aren't/weren't _exactly_ needed as they are,
either because nobody wants the secret policy feeling or because self
regulation is working almost nicely.
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
a) Drop all keywords but those of mips. Leaves mips and, more
importantly, its users with a vulnerable and unmaintained set of
packages.
...and break the tree spectacularly, causing huge amounts of pain for
your fellow developers when they encounter horrible repoman
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 14:00 +, Ferris McCormick wrote:
they get to devrel because you ensured there would be no one to catch
them --- you are the one who wanted to kill off the proctors, after
all.
...and the finger-pointing starts... Bravo!
I never have been able to figure out what the
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 09:25 -0500, Caleb Tennis wrote:
I never even mentioned any specific arch in my original request, nor
did I call any developer out. So please, nobody needs to take this
personally.
Correct, you did not. What I find absolutely *damning* is the fact that
as soon as any
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Ciaran McCreesh a écrit :
On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 20:06:00 +0100
Wulf C. Krueger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday, 09. January 2008 19:45:38 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Then the one particular part of 3.5.5 that's affected gets fixed
and priority
Wulf C. Krueger wrote:
On Tuesday, 08. January 2008 22:44:17 Chrissy Fullam wrote:
'bodies' would be needed to enforce CoC on #gentoo-dev
I don't really see any need for moderation on #gentoo-dev. We've managed
quite nicely without big brothers watching us so far and I think we
should
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 14:44 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
We want the Council to do something about this issue. You can deny
the issue all that you want or try to deflect conversation from the
actual issue, but your opinion isn't very important to the much of
the current developer pool,
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
And why does repoman do that?
Oh. Yeah. Because people with an attitude like yours think that the
correct way to fix a repoman message is to start nuking arch keywords,
ignoring what it does to the rest of the tree.
Dropping keywords works perfectly to have repoman
KDE 4.0.0 will be released on January, 11th 2008, and if things keep
going like they do now we might be able to put all the stuff into
~arch on the release day.
I'm going to mail about this again in -core soon.
Unless you mean hard masked, I do object. The code base has too many issues
and
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 15:11 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Heck, most of the repoman messages people are moaning about are caused
by developers doing exactly this.
No, most of the ones we're complaining about have nothing to do with
KEYWORDS, at all, and everything to do with changes to policy
В Срд, 09/01/2008 в 13:13 +0100, Fernando J. Pereda пишет:
Why taking it against arch teams? How is that different from certain
maintainer not taking care of a bug that holds stabilization of certain
package by some time measured in months ? I'll tell you my answer: 'no
difference at all'.
On Saturday 05 January 2008, Petteri Räty wrote:
Petteri Räty kirjoitti:
Current devmanual suggest to not use line lengths over 80 characters.
http://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-writing/file-format/index.html
I wrote a repoman check that checks that the value doesn't go over 80.
This is
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 11:51 -0800, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 14:00 +, Ferris McCormick wrote:
they get to devrel because you ensured there would be no one to catch
them --- you are the one who wanted to kill off the proctors, after
all.
...and the finger-pointing
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 18:56 +0100, Jan Kundrát wrote:
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
I have foo 1.0, which is mips. There is foo 2.0, which is stable
everywhere else. The foo 1.0 ebuild does not conform to current ebuild
standards. I want to commit changes to foo 2.0, and repoman won't allow
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 18:11 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 10:07:31 -0800
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Actually if they dump kde-3.5.5 and anything depending on it, then
they don't break the tree and everyone is happy, no?
Everyone except the users, who end up
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 18:45 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 19:29:53 +0100
Wulf C. Krueger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday, 09. January 2008 19:16:24 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
So what happens if a flaw is discovered in KDE 3.5.5 that allows
root access?
Then the
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 20:50 +0200, Petteri Räty wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh kirjoitti:
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:59:29 -0800
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The issue that was raised is that certain arch teams are incapable of
keeping up with the minimal workload they already have and
On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 22:31 +0100, Luca Barbato wrote:
Here is a list of interesting questions: Are we fine? What are we
going to do?
Please project leaders try to reply in short.
About the stuff I'm involved:
Are we fine?
GWN: The GWN is currently in a permanent state of hiatus. I
Luca Barbato kirjoitti:
Petteri Räty wrote:
- Get the remaining Generation 1 stuff out of the tree (not much left)
- Start using virtuals more
- Eclass cleanup and new make our setup even more automatic
any plan/idea about icedtea? as a ppc user I'd love too see it in
portage ^^;
lu
Well
My mail server died over the holidays and i ended up losing a lot of
mail, so if you've tried to contact me in the past 2 weeks or so, you'll
have to send again.
Deedra
--
Deedra Waters - Gentoo accessibility and amd64 -
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gentoo linux: http://www.gentoo.org
--
On Monday 07 January 2008, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
I already ranted about the fact that the dependency tree of our ebuilds
is vastly incomplete, as many lack dependency on zlib; trying to get
this fixed was impossible, as Donnie and other insisted that as zlib was
in system, we
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 18:56 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 20:50:38 +0200
Petteri Räty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So you just ignore for example my post about CIA activity for the
mips team?
That falls into the highly misleading category.
Yes, hard numbers are always
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 20:45 +0100, Vlastimil Babka wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
a) Drop all keywords but those of mips. Leaves mips and, more
importantly, its users with a vulnerable and unmaintained set of
packages.
...and break the tree spectacularly, causing huge amounts of
Ferris McCormick wrote:
they get to devrel because you ensured there would be no one to
catch them --- you are the one who wanted to kill off the
proctors, after all.
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
...and the finger-pointing starts... Bravo!
Ferris McCormick wrote:
To the extent
Correct, you did not. What I find absolutely *damning* is the fact that
as soon as any arches *were* mentioned, everybody was talking about the
same one. It's rather funny that everybody seems to have the exact same
impression of what architecture might be a slacker and would be affected
by
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 15:51 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
Anyway, as having a complete dependency tree is almost impossible
because of that, I have an alternative proposal: reducing the size of
the system package set. Right now system contains stuff like ncurses,
readline, zlib, autoconf,
Petteri Räty wrote:
Well having it open source doesn't mean automatically ppc support but
there are people working on it.
I'm quite aware about it I followed the improvement on this side since a
while even if I hadn't the time to try myself building it on ppc yet.
lu
--
Luca Barbato
Gentoo
On Thursday 03 January 2008, Roy Marples wrote:
On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 10:49 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
while is_older_than is negotiable, removing KV_* is not. those are
pretty tight utility functions which duplication in $random-packages will
only lead to problems (especially
On Thursday 03 January 2008, Roy Marples wrote:
On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 16:24 +, Roy Marples wrote:
On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 10:50 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
it also means a deprecation notice needs to be added here and
everywhere else that has changed. perhaps create a small script
Hi out there,
as I was told on bugzilla, I am taking this here.
I do not know if this was proposed earlier, but I noticed, that
USE=sqlite seems to just pull in any dev-db/sqlite, which in many
cases does not really mean any, like
DEPEND=sqlite? dev-db/sqlite
would do, but something like
On 09-01-2008 13:03:13 -0800, Chrissy Fullam wrote:
You have a negative history with wolf31o2, and the details of which quite
frankly should be kept off this mailing list. His negative experiences
throughout all of 2007 with Conflict Resolution and consequently Developer
Relations justify any
On Wednesday 09 January 2008, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 15:51 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
Anyway, as having a complete dependency tree is almost impossible
because of that, I have an alternative proposal: reducing the size of
the system package set. Right now system
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
What are we going to do:
GWN: no clue, looks like nothing
Well I hope there is somebody willing to at least try to get a minimal
gwn as new year kickoff out even just by summarizing this thread ^^;
RelEng: work on catalyst/genkernel, no further plans
I'm looking
Fabian Groffen wrote:
On 09-01-2008 13:03:13 -0800, Chrissy Fullam wrote:
You have a negative history with wolf31o2, and the details of which
quite frankly should be kept off this mailing list. ...
Let's take this discussion elsewhere.
IMHO, you have a very big conflict of interest in
Mike Frysinger wrote:
Well, openssh has always been questionable. Sure, *I* think it should
be on any Gentoo system I'd want to touch, but it really isn't necessary
for a lot of people. Moving this to, say, the server profiles only
would be acceptable to me, but then again, so is leaving it
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 22:42 +0100, Fabian Groffen wrote:
On 09-01-2008 13:03:13 -0800, Chrissy Fullam wrote:
You have a negative history with wolf31o2, and the details of which quite
frankly should be kept off this mailing list. His negative experiences
throughout all of 2007 with Conflict
Chrissy Fullam wrote:
I appreciate your opinion and your right to have such an opinion, however, I
have a hard time understanding your reason for said opinion. I would expect
any person to be able to say 'enough' and 'lets take this elsewhere.'
Perhaps he feels in such a way because your mail
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 16:42 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
Indeed. We ended up having to get perl into the stage1 because of
exactly these problems. It sucks. I'd love to be able to remove perl
(and anything else not necessarily required) out of the base system set.
If they're required in
I'm adding Developer Relations to this email and will be filing a formal
complaint against you. Have a good day.
lol.
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 16:26 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
that's fair. i'd also add that forcing the value into conf.d/clock
forces a reliance on openrc and prevents alternative init packages
(which we've seen people use). i know debian uses /etc/localtime, any
one know what other distro
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 23:27 +0100, Jan Kundrát wrote:
and you signed it as a Gentoo Developer Relations Lead.
Umm... because that's her .sig?
Wow. I'm really surprised that this concept is foreign to people. Are
you saying that you need beer from the pub because of your signature?
Are you
On Wednesday 09 January 2008, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 16:26 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
that's fair. i'd also add that forcing the value into conf.d/clock
forces a reliance on openrc and prevents alternative init packages
(which we've seen people use). i know debian
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Luca Barbato a écrit :
Here is a list of interesting questions: Are we fine? What are we
going to do?
Please project leaders try to reply in short.
Ok, technically I'm not security lead, but since I and rbu almost
completely handled the
On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 22:31 +0100, Luca Barbato wrote:
Here is a list of interesting questions: Are we fine? What are we
going to do?
Please project leaders try to reply in short.
tools-portage:
Are we fine? The short answer is no. We need more developers.
Unfortunately, real life work
Mike Frysinger kirjoitti:
i'd argue pretty vehemently against removing openssh from any default official
Gentoo install. ssh is defacto standard for loginning into any other
machines. it should be on all Gentoo desktops/severs/etc...
specialized/embedded/whatever are certainly free to
Luca Barbato wrote:
Here is a list of interesting questions: Are we fine? What are we
going to do?
Please project leaders try to reply in short.
[ wxWidgets ] (i'm not the lead but i don't think leio will mind)
Done:
We got 2.8 into the tree (yay). After a few bug reports that were
Well, I guess it's something that's been needing to be faced for some time now,
as difficult as it is to do. Regardless of the accusations and
counter-accusations flying around in this thread, I'll just go ahead and state
the fact that yes, we are a slacker arch.
Why? Because there's just
Luca Barbato wrote:
Here is a list of interesting questions: Are we fine? What are we
going to do?
Documentation
(Note: I'm not the project lead, but neysx isn't on the list, nor does
he send status updates, so I hope he and the rest of the project won't mind.
Are we fine?
Sure, why not.
Luca Barbato [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Here is a list of interesting questions: Are we fine? What are we
going to do?
Please project leaders try to reply in short.
About the stuff I'm involved:
web-apps
Are we fine?
webapps is more or less fine. We have several people in the herd
On Wednesday 09 January 2008, Kumba wrote:
Well, I guess it's something that's been needing to be faced for some time
now, as difficult as it is to do. Regardless of the accusations and
counter-accusations flying around in this thread, I'll just go ahead and
state the fact that yes, we are a
Thanks for your input on this, really made it look by 200% better from
what we have so far on this list and gives a much better point of view
to judge from.
Kumba++
Greetz
-Jokey
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
87 matches
Mail list logo
