On Mon, 22 Sep 2014, hasufell wrote:
Ulrich Mueller:
| • atomic commits (one logical change)
A version bump plus cleaning up older ebuilds will be considered
one logical change, I suppose?
I'd consider it two logical changes (e.g. imagine a user complaining
about ebuild removal... you
Dnia 2014-09-21, o godz. 23:36:58
Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se napisał(a):
Jonathan Callen wrote:
the correct response would be to ensure that the final commit
pushed (whether it be a merge commit or rebased) contains the
stabilization for both arches
I think this is one of the things to
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 12:10 AM, Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net wrote:
Devs doing gentoo all day could easily do one or two pushes a day, with
many commits in each. Those with less time might do the same work over
several days or a week and might push just once or twice that week, if
none of
On Fri, 19 Sep 2014 16:03:57 +0200
Tobias Klausmann klaus...@gentoo.org wrote:
As I pointed out, getting the right code into the tree is not the
problem here. It is extra work over the current way of doing it
(since I need to deal with a local commit that can't be ff'd or
rebased as git is
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014 08:56:04 +0200
Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
How can we distinguish between accidental and intentional stable
keyword removals? :)
(The lack of) Proper commit messages that point out those removals! ;)
But well, yeah, that'll require consistency and so on...
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 09/20/2014 06:33 PM, Roy Bamford wrote:
On 2014.09.18 00:31, Jack Morgan wrote:
Hello,
The PowerPC development team has had our 2nd monthly meeting and
I wanted to provide an update on where we are.
[snip]
I've sent email to the
On 09/22/14 06:31, Michael Weber wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 09/20/2014 06:33 PM, Roy Bamford wrote:
On 2014.09.18 00:31, Jack Morgan wrote:
Hello,
The PowerPC development team has had our 2nd monthly meeting and
I wanted to provide an update on where we are.
Dnia 2014-09-19, o godz. 18:17:12
Andreas HAttel (dilfridge) dilfri...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
dilfridge14/09/19 18:17:12
Modified: ChangeLog perl-module.eclass
Log:
Remove support for EAPI 1, 2, 3 in perl-module.eclass (no packages left in
the tree)
This could have
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 8:42 AM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote:
Also, CVS gets your name wrong. I wonder how it is possible with such
an awesome modern piece of technology ;).
CVS itself does support unicode in the commit messages. I have no
idea where the name comes from in the
Michał Górny:
Dnia 2014-09-19, o godz. 18:17:12
Andreas HAttel (dilfridge) dilfri...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
dilfridge14/09/19 18:17:12
Modified: ChangeLog perl-module.eclass
Log:
Remove support for EAPI 1, 2, 3 in perl-module.eclass (no packages left in
the tree)
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014, hasufell wrote:
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Gentoo_git_workflow
But so far, not many people have been particularly interested in
the details of these things. I'm also not sure if the ML is the
right way to figure out these details.
Another issue, should we require
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Mon, 22 Sep 2014, hasufell wrote:
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Gentoo_git_workflow
But so far, not many people have been particularly interested in
the details of these things. I'm also not sure if the ML is the
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 11:29:52AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
Another issue, should we require Signed-off-by: lines? At least
for things that are contributed by users?
…
Thanks for bringing this up. I had circulated the start of
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 12:52 PM, W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 11:29:52AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
Another issue, should we require Signed-off-by: lines? At least
for things that are contributed by
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 02:13:53PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
Perhaps the c clause should be clarified that the source files
themselves were not modified - not the commit message.
The DCO text is verbatim copies only [1], so I don't think adjusting
clauses is legal. And if you're modifying
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 2:28 PM, W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 02:13:53PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
Perhaps the c clause should be clarified that the source files
themselves were not modified - not the commit message.
The DCO text is verbatim copies only [1],
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 03:13:35PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 2:28 PM, W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 02:13:53PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
Perhaps the c clause should be clarified that the source files
themselves were not modified -
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 3:27 PM, W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 03:13:35PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 2:28 PM, W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us wrote:
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 02:13:53PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
Perhaps the c clause
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 3:43 PM, W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us wrote:
There's no Signed-off-by on the commits adding the DCO to the Linux
tree ;). The only information I can find claiming copyright and
licensing by one of the DCO authors is at
http://developercertificate.org/. I suppose
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 04:56:58PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
In any case, I don't think it is necessary to actually modify the DCO.
Ah, good. Then the verbatim copy license is sufficient, and we don't
need to decide if the GPLv2 with Linus' exception applies.
I don't believe that it requires
From: Alexander Berntsen alexan...@plaimi.net
Signed-off-by: Alexander Berntsen berna...@gentoo.org
---
Tested Zac's version. Seems to work fine.
man/emerge.1| 3 ++-
pym/_emerge/depgraph.py | 6 --
2 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/man/emerge.1
Signed-off-by: Alexander Berntsen berna...@gentoo.org
---
Add exception in case eselect is not found. Fix output a tiny bit.
pym/_emerge/actions.py | 17 +++--
pym/_emerge/post_emerge.py | 5 -
2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git
Signed-off-by: Alexander Berntsen berna...@gentoo.org
---
Fix some comment snafus that Arfrever spotted.
pym/_emerge/actions.py | 17 +++--
pym/_emerge/post_emerge.py | 5 -
2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/pym/_emerge/actions.py
From: Alexander Berntsen alexan...@plaimi.net
Signed-off-by: Alexander Berntsen berna...@gentoo.org
---
Update manpage header, as pointed out by Arfrever.
man/emerge.1| 5 +++--
pym/_emerge/depgraph.py | 6 --
2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
diff --git
Hi,
could we have possibility to disable some repoman checks in repo
configs? See e.g. https://github.com/gentoo-science/sci/issues/268
--
Jauhien
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Fixes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=523182
---
bin/phase-functions.sh | 4
bin/phase-helpers.sh | 4
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
diff --git a/bin/phase-functions.sh b/bin/phase-functions.sh
index 9bc3eb5..9117719 100644
--- a/bin/phase-functions.sh
+++
Zac, Michal,
Would you be willing to merge this ?
If env/ instead of package.env is a deal breaker, I can change that.
A bashrc like mechanism is more practical for us but package.env will do
the trick too
and we really want to have this in mainline portage.
Thanks,
Bertrand
On Thu, Sep 18,
On 09/22/2014 08:56 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
Fixes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=523182
---
bin/phase-functions.sh | 4
bin/phase-helpers.sh | 4
2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
Your changes appear to correctly fix the specific issue reported in bug
523182. However, I
On 09/22/2014 09:16 AM, Bertrand Simonnet wrote:
Zac, Michal,
Would you be willing to merge this ?
If env/ instead of package.env is a deal breaker, I can change that.
A bashrc like mechanism is more practical for us but package.env will do
the trick too
and we really want to have this in
On 09/22/2014 11:16 AM, Zac Medico wrote:
On 09/22/2014 09:16 AM, Bertrand Simonnet wrote:
Zac, Michal,
Would you be willing to merge this ?
If env/ instead of package.env is a deal breaker, I can change that.
A bashrc like mechanism is more practical for us but package.env will do
the
On 09/22/2014 05:44 AM, Jauhien Piatlicki wrote:
Hi,
could we have possibility to disable some repoman checks in repo
configs? See e.g. https://github.com/gentoo-science/sci/issues/268
--
Jauhien
How about if we add a new field to metadata/layout.conf, containing a
list of identifiers
Did you mean env/ files ? Having a different behaviour for
/etc/portage/package.env and $profile/package.env would be confusing.
Parsing env/ atom/files association in python would be a good idea. We
should get the benefits of both I believe.
The list of files to be sourced by bash could contain
On 09/22/2014 11:43 AM, Bertrand Simonnet wrote:
Did you mean env/ files ?
Yes.
Having a different behaviour for
/etc/portage/package.env and $profile/package.env would be confusing.
We could call package.bashenv (or something like that), in order to make
the difference from package.env
Sounds good :)
Michal, would that work for you ? If so, I'll start on it tomorrow.
On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 5:48 PM, Zac Medico zmed...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 09/22/2014 11:43 AM, Bertrand Simonnet wrote:
Did you mean env/ files ?
Yes.
Having a different behaviour for
34 matches
Mail list logo
