Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: devqawarn()?

2011-09-01 Thread Zac Medico
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 09/01/2011 09:19 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 08:25:14 -0700 Zac Medico > wrote: > >> On 09/01/2011 04:02 AM, Petteri Räty wrote: >>> Have Portage defaults so that users only see if them if they >>> read the merge logs and then de

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: devqawarn()?

2011-09-01 Thread Michał Górny
On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 08:25:14 -0700 Zac Medico wrote: > On 09/01/2011 04:02 AM, Petteri Räty wrote: > > Have Portage defaults so that users only see if them if they read > > the merge logs and then developer profiles can set the settings to > > log them? > > As far as I know, this is already the

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: devqawarn()?

2011-09-01 Thread Petteri Räty
On 1.9.2011 17.12, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > On 14:44 Thu 01 Sep , Petteri Räty wrote: >> One thing to note is that we should get eqawarn into the next EAPI. > > Why? > So that it wouldn't fall back on einfo where not available. Regards, Petteri

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: devqawarn()?

2011-09-01 Thread Zac Medico
On 09/01/2011 04:02 AM, Petteri Räty wrote: > Have Portage defaults so that users only see if them if they read the > merge logs and then developer profiles can set the settings to log them? As far as I know, this is already the case. The current default set by portage in /usr/share/portage/config

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: devqawarn()?

2011-09-01 Thread Donnie Berkholz
On 14:44 Thu 01 Sep , Petteri Räty wrote: > One thing to note is that we should get eqawarn into the next EAPI. Why? -- Thanks, Donnie Donnie Berkholz Council Member / Sr. Developer Gentoo Linux Blog: http://dberkholz.com pgpC80OrHx438.pgp Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: devqawarn()?

2011-09-01 Thread Petteri Räty
On 1.9.2011 14.31, Michał Górny wrote: > On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 14:02:11 +0300 > Petteri Räty wrote: > >> On 1.9.2011 13.51, Michał Górny wrote: >>> On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 13:44:47 +0300 >>> Petteri Räty wrote: >>> On 1.9.2011 12.03, Michał Górny wrote: > Hello, > > A quick idea. Righ

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: devqawarn()?

2011-09-01 Thread Michał Górny
On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 14:02:11 +0300 Petteri Räty wrote: > On 1.9.2011 13.51, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 13:44:47 +0300 > > Petteri Räty wrote: > > > >> On 1.9.2011 12.03, Michał Górny wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> A quick idea. Right now eclasses sometimes do API changes and >

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: devqawarn()?

2011-09-01 Thread Petteri Räty
On 1.9.2011 13.51, Michał Górny wrote: > On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 13:44:47 +0300 > Petteri Räty wrote: > >> On 1.9.2011 12.03, Michał Górny wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> A quick idea. Right now eclasses sometimes do API changes and start >>> yelling at users merging ebuilds using outdates APIs. This often

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: devqawarn()?

2011-09-01 Thread Michał Górny
On Thu, 01 Sep 2011 13:44:47 +0300 Petteri Räty wrote: > On 1.9.2011 12.03, Michał Górny wrote: > > Hello, > > > > A quick idea. Right now eclasses sometimes do API changes and start > > yelling at users merging ebuilds using outdates APIs. This often > > means users start filling bugs about out

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: devqawarn()?

2011-09-01 Thread Petteri Räty
On 1.9.2011 12.03, Michał Górny wrote: > Hello, > > A quick idea. Right now eclasses sometimes do API changes and start > yelling at users merging ebuilds using outdates APIs. This often means > users start filling bugs about outdated ebuilds requiring maintainers > either to ignore that or start

[gentoo-dev] RFC: devqawarn()?

2011-09-01 Thread Michał Górny
Hello, A quick idea. Right now eclasses sometimes do API changes and start yelling at users merging ebuilds using outdates APIs. This often means users start filling bugs about outdated ebuilds requiring maintainers either to ignore that or start updating old ebuilds retroactively. Maybe we shoul