[gentoo-dev] Repoman patch
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 07:59:22PM -0800, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Details/bugfix to follow for all devs, but basically you'll have trouble > committing with CVS to both a package directory and the files/ directory > in the same commit in the meantime. Thanks to zmedico, here's the fix for repoman: http://dev.gentoo.org/~zmedico/tmp/repoman-commit-file-prefix.patch -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 pgp5oNcmKEI2r.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Unexpected CVS downtime
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 04:59:43PM -0800, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Hi folks, and apologies, but I've had to take the primary CVS/SVN > services down to investigate some really weird behavior. Everything is back up now. I was really confused over this, since fsck on the various volumes all showed up clean, and then I traced it to a new Repoman bug :-). Details/bugfix to follow for all devs, but basically you'll have trouble committing with CVS to both a package directory and the files/ directory in the same commit in the meantime. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 pgpgtZRwx31qw.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Unexpected CVS downtime
Hi folks, and apologies, but I've had to take the primary CVS/SVN services down to investigate some really weird behavior. The short version: # cvs up M ChangeLog # repoman commit -m '...' cvs commit: Up-to-date check failed for `ChangeLog' cvs [commit aborted]: correct above errors first! !!! Exiting on cvs (shell) error code: 1 -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 pgpMljGpCeosq.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] [v4] Planning for automatic assignment computation of bugs
"Robin H. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > On Sun, Oct 19, 2008 at 12:32:44PM -0700, Alec Warner wrote: > > What if my herd email address is different from my bugzie address? > > Can I have both in herds.xml? What if my herd address *isn't* a > > bugzie account, will the world end? > > I don't know any herd where the herd email is not the same as the > bugzie email. Why would this case arise anyway? The mail aliases reside > on dev, and the duplication doesn't make sense. the gentopia guys seem to have this annoying scheme: herd email is [EMAIL PROTECTED] while bugzi account is [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > How can we automatically detect when developers make mistakes in > > editing herds.xml? > > There is a validation CGI in Bugzie, I created it for when somebody (I > forgot who) was checking all of the metadata and herd emails > previously, which we should probably automated. for me. i have started using it today.. thanks! > > > > 1. For handling no-herd, we should add an entry into > > > herds.xml to catch it (maintainer-needed g.o). Every herd > > > listed in an ebuild MUST be in herds.xml. > > > > You and I both know this is not going to be true. Complicated > > solution; make Repoman do it. Certainly it is the 'correct' thing to > > do; however I don't expect it to get implemented or deployed quickly. > > Hacky solution: run script on osprey that tries to validate tree > > metadata against herds.xml and annoy herds who forgot to add > > themselves. > > Yes, automation is useful here. very few packages do not have a herd; no ebuilds have a wrong herd listed, but there are tons of other errors in our metadata... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
Jan Kundrát wrote: > kashani wrote: >> How easy is it to checkout current GDP docs > > Append "?passthru=1" to the end of the URL. > >> and make changes to them? > > I take it you want to make a patch. In such case, edit the file and > submit the diff via Bugzilla. > > Cheers, > -jkt > Or use anoncvs for the gentoo module. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Flags to punt (including: kerberos USE flag)
Josh Saddler wrote: > Long as we're discussing things to punt, here's some stuff to kick out > of the desktop profile: and for the server profiles there's mailwrapper - merely broken, nothing useful at all Tobias signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds
Mark Loeser wrote: > Removing Stable Ebuilds > > If an ebuild meets the time criteria above, and there are no technical issues > preventing stabilization, then the maintainer MAY choose to delete an older > version even if it is the most recent stable version for a particular arch. What if this would break deps or it's a very common package for example belonging to the set of system packages? If we would opt for such a fixed timeframe for architectures teams to fix bugs I'd like to rate those bugs at least partially like security@ does - that would allow us to have different timeframes for stabilization depending on how much the package in questions is (expected to be) installed at our users' systems. In my opinion we would need to address two main concerns with this discussion: 1) What can we do to help understaffed architecture teams? What about using a tinderbox (yeah, i know - we have lots of tinderboxes already around) which automatically (re)builds stable-candidates and those of the candidates which a) includes a test phase and b) pass that test phase might be stabled by the maintainer/herd and not only the architecture team, for example? 2) When do we move an architecture back to ~arch? We would need to define a threshold of when an stable architecture has to enter a probation period (and who and what's going to start that process) and a timeframe after which either the architecture is moved back to ~arch or the architecture team has proven that it is able to maintain stable keywords (define who's going to decide this). Tobias signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
Re: [gentoo-dev] An official Gentoo wiki
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Tue, 11 Nov 2008 18:45:32 -0500 > Mark Loeser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What are others feelings on this? What issues do you see with having > > a wiki? Do you see anyway to resolve the issue you see with us > > having a wiki? > > What will policy on articles that are horribly dangerous or outright > wrong? Is Gentoo prepared to block or warn about articles that recommend > stupid things? If a warning is used, what will be used to distinguish > between a generic "wiki, not necessarily checked by sane people" and a > "article known to be horrible"? Wikipedia started using an extension for marking pages as "validated". See [1]. This would allow us to setup a group of "trusted people" (developers, long-time users, well-known contributors - for example) who would be able to review pages and tag them that way. Non-reviewed pages could show a header then clearly stating that this specific page hasn't been reviewed and might contain inaccurate information. Tobias [1] http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:FlaggedRevs signature.asc Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil
