Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] i18n project

On Сбт, 2006-06-10 at 15:11 +0200, Jan Kundrát wrote: > a) Translation of metadata.xml stuff in our tree (Is there any method to > keep them up-to-date when the English text changes? Something like > "revision" attribute that gets bumped when the English text gets updated?) While we do not have "v

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise thread -- a try of clarification

Patrick Lauer wrote: On Fri, 2006-06-09 at 16:14 -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: How exactly is it easier to manage a large number of ebuilds versus a small number? It is easier to manage one large overlay than managing 35 small overlays. Communication overhead, duplication of effort, ..

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise thread -- a try of clarification

On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:27:29 -0400 Chris Gianelloni <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [lots of good stuff - +lots Chris] > Not so many moons ago, new ebuilds were submitted to bugzilla. The > bug wranglers would assign the bugs to the team most likely to end up > as the maintainers, and new ebuilds eit

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] i18n project

On Вск, 2006-06-11 at 02:16 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: > On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 15:11:50 +0200 > Jan Kundrát <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > b) Localization of Gentoo-developed applications (portage, > > gentoolkit,...) including their manpages > > I don't really like this one. Documentation, sure, bu

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] i18n project

On 6/10/06, Jan Kundrát <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: So, let's rephrase it a bit. The following items represent my view about the i18n team's responsibilities: a) Translation of metadata.xml stuff in our tree (Is there any method to keep them up-to-date when the English text changes? Something lik

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dealing with /var/cache on unmerge

Daniel Drake wrote: > Mike Frysinger wrote: >> maybe give ebuilds a way to maintain a list of files that portage >> should nuke when unmerging the package ... > > Something similar to this would be useful for kernel ebuilds, as simply > unmerging kernel source will leave a load of temporary and ob

[gentoo-dev] Perforce packages have been removed from the tree

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi, Just a note that no-one took over maintainership of the perforce packages, so I've removed them from the tree. I've archived a copy in my personal overlay, just in case there are any Gentoo users out there who'd like to help maintain them. If y

Re: [gentoo-dev] virtual/x11-7* hides real bugs and breaks good ebuilds

Donnie Berkholz wrote: > Jakub Moc wrote: >> Olivier Crete wrote: >>> Is there a recent list of non-ported packages ? Maybe we should do a >>> last effort to port everything for a week or two and then package.mask >>> the packages that no one cares enough about to port them. >> Hmmm, not a up2date

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dealing with /var/cache on unmerge

On Sunday 11 June 2006 05:01, Jakub Moc wrote: > Daniel Drake wrote: > > Mike Frysinger wrote: > >> maybe give ebuilds a way to maintain a list of files that portage > >> should nuke when unmerging the package ... > > > > Something similar to this would be useful for kernel ebuilds, as simply > > u

Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item

On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 11:37:42AM -0400, Alec Warner wrote: > Have the GWN posted to -core in a sane time period prior to it's > release. I seriously doubt anyone cares about whether the publication > is always "on time" (whatever that may be). If it's a bi-weekly > publication it doesn't alw

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise -- Proposal

On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 01:37:15PM +0200, Markus Ullmann wrote: > Okay, so after figuring out open problems (thanks to kloeri and various > other people for help here), we now have a resolution that should > satisfy all involved parties here. This should adress dostrow's demands > as well. While I

Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Marius Mauch wrote: > On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 01:00:43 +0200 > Patrick Lauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 11:37 -0400, Alec Warner wrote: >>> Have the GWN posted to -core in a sane time period prior to it's >>> release. I seriou

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise -- Proposal

Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: > On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 01:37:15PM +0200, Markus Ullmann wrote: >> Okay, so after figuring out open problems (thanks to kloeri and various >> other people for help here), we now have a resolution that should >> satisfy all involved parties here. This should adress dost

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise thread -- a try of clarification

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Chris Gianelloni wrote: > [. . .] Right on! :) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFEi/j4rsJQqN81j74RAsRHAKCJsN09KKGlLq5CD4Bh/7r9QYJ12QCgnFx1 lRWrDI1euePCP0MrwoP/Emg= =G9qu -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- gentoo-de

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] i18n project

Marius Mauch wrote: > and my point is that users often don't even realize that > their post contains non-english text Make Portage add a line with "Some of the previous errors were reported in non-English language. If you want to get support from official channel, please run `LC_ALL=C command`."

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] i18n project

Peter Volkov (pva) wrote: > On Сбт, 2006-06-10 at 15:11 +0200, Jan Kundrát wrote: >> a) Translation of metadata.xml stuff in our tree (Is there any method to >> keep them up-to-date when the English text changes? Something like >> "revision" attribute that gets bumped when the English text gets upd

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] i18n project

Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy wrote: > Keep only English in metadata.xml. Using tools such as intltool or > xml2po to extract strings and let i18n translate/maintain .po files > themselves. Generated .mo files will be included in metadata directory > when rsycing. Another portage hack to use .mo files in me

[gentoo-dev] Re: Project Sunrise -- Proposal

On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:37:15 +0200, Markus Ullmann wrote: > 1) m-w / m-n requirement > > Only ebuilds that are reported to bugzie (valid bug#) and set to > maintainer-wanted are allowed here as well as maintainer-needed ones. > > maintainer-needed are only allowed if they're removed from the tre

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Project Sunrise thread -- a try of clarification

On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 02:04:57PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: > > "svn co http://overlays.gentoo.org/svn/proj/sunrise/category/application"; > "emerge application" > As long as it's made for pulling single ebuilds (and their support files), i think it's really helpfull. It's exactly the same

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Project Sunrise -- Proposal

On Sun, 11 Jun 2006 07:33:19 -0400 Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:37:15 +0200, Markus Ullmann wrote: > > > 1) m-w / m-n requirement > > > > Only ebuilds that are reported to bugzie (valid bug#) and set to > > maintainer-wanted are allowed here as well as maintainer-nee

[gentoo-dev] Re: Project Sunrise -- Proposal

Peter wrote: > Um, there are numerous "new" not-in-portage-tree ebuilds submitted to bz > which have been assigned to teams. However, they may still languish. They > were assigned by the wranglers, and not improperly. Yet, for many reasons, > the bugs wait. So, will there be a mechanism for a contr

Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item

After waiting for my replies for 24+ hours I presume they disappeared into a blackhole while we were lacking lists, so I'm resending. Forwarded Message > From: Christel Dahlskjaer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org > Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meet

Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item

The reply appears to have disappeared into a black hole. Forwarded Message > From: Christel Dahlskjaer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org > Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item > Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:26:31 +0100 > > On Sat

Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item

Another vanishing reply from yesterday. Forwarded Message > From: Christel Dahlskjaer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org > Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item > Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:44:02 +0100 > > On Sat, 2006-06-10 at

Re: [gentoo-dev] virtual/x11-7* hides real bugs and breaks good ebuilds

Jakub Moc wrote: > Donnie, pingy! ;) Just a friendly reminder to run the script again, so > that we can do a last attempt on fixing the remaining stuff before > resorting to more drastic solutions... Yeah, it's on my list, but I've got family here all weekend so no time to work on stuff. Thanks,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise -- Proposal

Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: > While I do think this proposal is much better than the previous > non-existing proposal, it still doesn't address the problem of having > the sunrise overlay hosted on a non *.gentoo.org address to make it > 100% clear to the public that it is unsupported. It's no mor

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Project Sunrise thread -- a try of clarification

On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 03:42:19PM +0200, Christian Birchinger wrote: > On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 02:04:57PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: > > > > "svn co http://overlays.gentoo.org/svn/proj/sunrise/category/application"; > > "emerge application" > > > > As long as it's made for pulling single ebu

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Project Sunrise -- Proposal

On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 04:01:50PM +0200, Stefan Schweizer wrote: > You need to ask a team member then to move them to maintainer-wanted. > Usually the teams have no problem with moving bugs over to > maintainer-wanted because they know that they cannot maintain everything > themselves. But Projec

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise -- Proposal

On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 09:43:01AM -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > It's no more or less supported than anything else on > overlays.gentoo.org. The word "overlays" ought to be enough. I suppose > you oppose the whole concept, anyhow? No, I am certainly not opposed to overlays in general. I even mai

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise -- Proposal

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: | However, as has been pointed out several times in this thread already, | back when the devloper community agreed to the overlays project it was | also agreed that projects similar to what is now known as Project | Sunrise

[gentoo-dev] Re: Project Sunrise -- Proposal

Dan Meltzer wrote: > On 6/10/06, Markus Ullmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> 2) Not one large tree but subdirs, one per herd >> >> to help herds better keeping track of which parts are alive in the >> overlay, each herd's ebuilds are grouped in a subdir, e.g. there will be >> a netmon/ dir with ne

Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item

On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 05:50:05PM +0100, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: > > As for why the Council, because thats what people suggested when I asked > > which route to take when he was unresponsive. I see, and that puts your suggestion of conctacting the council in a different angle. [some stuff sk

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Project Sunrise -- Proposal

Ryan Hill wrote: >> 2. People who contribute good ebuilds over a certain period of time are >> allowed upon decision by project devs to actively help maintaining the >> project. They'll be given commit rights for the project then. Same frome >> above applies here: If we notice any abuse, we revoke

Re: [gentoo-dev] Project Sunrise -- Proposal

On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 06:53:51PM +0100, Stuart Herbert wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA1 > > Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: > | However, as has been pointed out several times in this thread already, > | back when the devloper community agreed to the overlays project it was >

Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item

On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 09:27 +0200, Wernfried Haas wrote: > On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 04:28:36AM +0100, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: > > I would like to ask that the Council discuss the current state and > > future of the GWN at their next meeting. > > Council? Why escalate things? Have you talked to U

Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item

On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 10:07 +0200, Lars Weiler wrote: > Congratulations. I just unsubscribed from the > gwn-feedback-alias after reading your mail. > > * Christel Dahlskjaer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [06/06/10 04:28 +0100]: > > 1. Reliability. The GWN claims to be a weekly publication, yet it > > frequ

[gentoo-dev] A Small Clarification

An erroneous idea seems generally to prevail, and has lately found expression on the mailing lists, that I have some sort of personal problem with the GWN authors; that is, that I think them unsuitable for the job and would like them removed. This idea cannot be too explicitly contradicted. I woul

Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item

On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 10:56 +0200, Patrick Lauer wrote: > On Sat, 2006-06-10 at 03:28 +0100, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: > > I would like to ask that the Council discuss the current state and > > future of the GWN at their next meeting. > I don't think you have to escalate that far. We should be abl

Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item

On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 10:56:48 +0200 Patrick Lauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | > I also believe that when posting an article or interview, a copy | > should be sent to the relevant people to ensure that they are ok | > with what is being posted (my dev of the week interview, for | > example, was rat

Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item

On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 01:13:36PM +0100, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: > To take an example, there were made up quotes in my GWN interview, > however, nothing of great harm. I believe that time it was a case of > attempting to make it more fun, it is however a worrying trend. One of my blog entries

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Project Sunrise -- Proposal

Stefan Schweizer schrieb: Marius Mauch wrote: On Sat, 10 Jun 2006 13:37:15 +0200 Markus Ullmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Okay, so after figuring out open problems (thanks to kloeri and various other people for help here), we now have a resolution that should satisfy all involved parties her

Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item

Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: > On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 01:13:36PM +0100, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: >> To take an example, there were made up quotes in my GWN interview, >> however, nothing of great harm. I believe that time it was a case of >> attempting to make it more fun, it is however a worryin

Re: [gentoo-dev] July Council Meeting: Requested Agenda Item

Donnie Berkholz wrote: Henrik Brix Andersen wrote: On Sat, Jun 10, 2006 at 01:13:36PM +0100, Christel Dahlskjaer wrote: To take an example, there were made up quotes in my GWN interview, however, nothing of great harm. I believe that time it was a case of attempting to make it more fun, it is

[gentoo-dev] aging ebuilds with unstable keywords

Hi, This is an automatically created email message. http://gentoo.tamperd.net/stable has just been updated with 15545 ebuilds. The page shows results from a number of tests that are run against the ebuilds. The tests are: * if a version has been masked for 30 days or more. * if an arch was in KE

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] i18n project

2006-06-10, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò sanoi, jotta: > I'm actually going to work to add to Portage (will-be-2.2) i18n > capabilities next week, and I'll be doing for sure the Italian > translation. Would this be a fix to Portage NLS bug ? If so, have