[gentoo-dev] Re: How about a monthly bumpday?
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 09:41:59 -0500 Mark Loeser wrote: > As Mike said, for ones with maintainers, don't touch them unless you > have explicit permission. We have maintainers for a reason, and if you > don't know the intricacies of the package, you shouldn't be touching it. > You should know how it works, how to test it, and what the normal > problems of a bump are. And if you're already getting the maintainer to take the time to review your work and make sure it doesn't break anything they might as well be doing the bump themselves. That said, I think there's still a case for taking action yourself if you can't get a response out of the maintainer within a reasonable time and the bump is necessary (ie. fixes a real problem, not just because there's a newer version out). -- fonts,by design, by neglect gcc-porting, for a fact or just for effect wxwidgets @ gentoo EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 21:42:43 + (UTC) Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > So a gmail account is now considered mandatory for Gentoo devs, at > least if they want calendar access? > > What about those who might think that Google knows enough about them > with search and the web crawling and database correlation Google > does, and whatever ad serving might leak thru, and object to having a > gmail account on principle? That's OK. I'm a Gentoo dev and I won't be "subscribing". Fair enough? jer
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item
The problem here, I think, is everyone has their opinion about what it means for something to go stable, and I haven't seen more than one or two references to what has been predetermined as policy for stabilization. I think we should do a little less debating over personal opinions (which is a "hot" topic, apparently) and more about how Gentoo guidelines determine what can go stable. If the guidelines don't cover this, then they ought to be fixed. -- Jacob "For then there will be great distress, unequaled from the beginning of the world until now — and never to be equaled again. If those days had not been cut short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the elect those days will be shortened." Are you ready?
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 02:24:46AM +0100, Ben de Groot wrote: > On 11 March 2010 01:25, William Hubbs wrote: > > ??If someone has a package that truly works with either python 2 or 3, > > ??what is the harm in automatically pulling in python 3 and installing > > ??the package for both python 2 and 3? > > > > ??As long as pulling in python-3 doesn't change the system's default > > ??python interpretor I don't see a problem with having them both > > ??installed. > I've seen enough python-3 specific bugs to know it is not without > problems. It's a waste of time and resources for something that is > not ready to be used anyway. While it can be argued that that is > what our testing branch is for, it is certainly not something that > should be pushed to stable users. What does upstream say about python 3.1? Are they calling it stable? Yes, it is incompatible with python-2, but, it is set up so both can be on a system at the same time. I'm no expert on python, but I think even upstream has python deliberately set up that way. > Even if it would be just "dead weight", it is not something we should > wish for. It is bloat, it is unnecessary, and causes more problems > than that it solves. Why should users have to compile multiple > python versions, if they only use one anyway? If they are only using python-2 and all of the packages they use only work with python-2, then the dependencies of the packages should be fixed to reflect that. Even if python-3 is stable and the dependencies of the packages they have say that they only support python-2 python-3 will not be on their systems. Someone compared pythohn to gcc earlier in this thread, but I'm not sure that is a fair comparison. AFAIK, gcc is not slotted by upstream, and python is. I think that makes a difference in how we handle it. William pgptqhpeP9Ks3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Split desktop profile patches & news item for review
On 8 March 2010 02:17, Theo Chatzimichos wrote: > > I attached the news item, please review. Meanwhile, I'll create docs patches. > > Also, I'm CCing hardened as my No.1 question was not answered. Please do. > Thanks Seeing as there were no further comments, I think we are good to go! Cheers, -- Ben de Groot Gentoo Linux developer (qt, media, lxde, desktop-misc) __
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item
On 11 March 2010 01:25, William Hubbs wrote: > If someone has a package that truly works with either python 2 or 3, > what is the harm in automatically pulling in python 3 and installing > the package for both python 2 and 3? > > As long as pulling in python-3 doesn't change the system's default > python interpretor I don't see a problem with having them both > installed. I've seen enough python-3 specific bugs to know it is not without problems. It's a waste of time and resources for something that is not ready to be used anyway. While it can be argued that that is what our testing branch is for, it is certainly not something that should be pushed to stable users. Even if it would be just "dead weight", it is not something we should wish for. It is bloat, it is unnecessary, and causes more problems than that it solves. Why should users have to compile multiple python versions, if they only use one anyway? Cheers, -- Ben de Groot Gentoo Linux developer (qt, media, lxde, desktop-misc) __
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 09:42:43PM +, Duncan wrote: > So a gmail account is now considered mandatory for Gentoo devs, at least > if they want calendar access? A Google account != Gmail account. I use Google calendars extensively myself, but it's NOT linked to a Gmail account. So the above really should have said Google account. That said, simply emailing vcard events to an organizer should work fine. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee & Infrastructure Lead E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 11:43:04PM +0100, Ben de Groot wrote: > On 10 March 2010 18:36, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis > wrote: > > Almost everybody has at least 1 package installed which supports both > > Python 2 > > and Python 3 and depends on dev-lang/python without version specification, > > so Python 3 would be pulled into dependency graph, > > The problem is that we want to prevent that from happening. > Or at the very least advise our users that they should mask > python-3* unless they want it to be pulled in. If someone has a package that truly works with either python 2 or 3, what is the harm in automatically pulling in python 3 and installing the package for both python 2 and 3? As long as pulling in python-3 doesn't change the system's default python interpretor I don't see a problem with having them both installed. William pgpnrRLKYVc4i.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
On Wednesday 10 March 2010 19:02:19 Gilles Dartiguelongue wrote: > Le jeudi 11 mars 2010 à 05:28 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan a écrit : > > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 3:12 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > > > So a gmail account is now considered mandatory for Gentoo devs, at > > > least if they want calendar access? > > > > Write access. > > > > > What about those who might think that Google knows enough about them > > > with search and the web crawling and database correlation Google does, > > > and whatever ad serving might leak thru, and object to having a gmail > > > account on principle? > > > > If some gentoo dev actually has this problem, they should speak up and > > we'll discuss it then. > > I have a problem with using google resources out of lazyness (nothing > from what I read indicates the opposite) to setup and/or ask infra what > can be done to solve this need. infra is already tasked enough without having to tackle such a trivial resource need. google calendar is working today and exports all of its stuff via a variety of formats for people to important into their own calendaring system. there are plenty of devs who dont have a problem signing in to use google calendar which means it should be trivial for you to find someone to add an event if you so desire. or to use a standard invite format and e-mail it to someone who simply adds it to the calendar via the gmail interface. -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
Le jeudi 11 mars 2010 à 05:28 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan a écrit : > On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 3:12 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > > So a gmail account is now considered mandatory for Gentoo devs, at least > > if they want calendar access? > > > > Write access. > > > What about those who might think that Google knows enough about them with > > search and the web crawling and database correlation Google does, and > > whatever ad serving might leak thru, and object to having a gmail account > > on principle? > > > > If some gentoo dev actually has this problem, they should speak up and > we'll discuss it then. I have a problem with using google resources out of lazyness (nothing from what I read indicates the opposite) to setup and/or ask infra what can be done to solve this need. -- Gilles Dartiguelongue Gentoo signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 3:12 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > So a gmail account is now considered mandatory for Gentoo devs, at least > if they want calendar access? > Write access. > What about those who might think that Google knows enough about them with > search and the web crawling and database correlation Google does, and > whatever ad serving might leak thru, and object to having a gmail account > on principle? > If some gentoo dev actually has this problem, they should speak up and we'll discuss it then. -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
Le mercredi 10 mars 2010 à 18:04 -0500, Richard Freeman a écrit : > On 03/10/2010 04:42 PM, Duncan wrote: > > So a gmail account is now considered mandatory for Gentoo devs, at least > > if they want calendar access? > > > > What about those who might think that Google knows enough about them with > > search and the web crawling and database correlation Google does, and > > whatever ad serving might leak thru, and object to having a gmail account > > on principle? > > > > Honestly, Google calendar works well enough that I'm not sure that I > like the idea of re-inventing the wheel. Maybe if somebody designed > some kind of open calendar access protocol that was comparable. > > If you don't like Google tracking all that you do, create a gmail > account and don't use it for ANYTHING but Google Calendar. That will > greatly limit the amount of database correlation they can do. > > If somebody has a suggestion for a reasonable multi-user calendaring > infrastructure that has reasonably close feature parity and isn't a bear > to maintain I'm sure it would be considered. that's called caldav. There's at least one opensource server that is working decently well with evolution although it's in php. -- Gilles Dartiguelongue Gentoo signature.asc Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
On Wednesday 10 March 2010 16:42:43 Duncan wrote: > Mike Frysinger posted on Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:45:21 -0500 as excerpted: > > the front page of http://gentoo.org/ now links to a Google Calendar (see > > side bar). this has been around for a while, but it seems it's been > > more of an "underground" thing, so it's time to raise its awareness. > > > > like other aspects of Gentoo, all Gentoo developers have access to it to > > add their own events. anything Gentoo related may be added of course ! > > meetings, events, scheduled package events, etc... > > > > the access step requires a bit of help though -- simply e-mail me off > > list your gmail account and we can get you set up. once you have > > access, you may easily pass it on to other Gentoo peeps. > > So a gmail account is now considered mandatory for Gentoo devs, at least > if they want calendar access? > > What about those who might think that Google knows enough about them with > search and the web crawling and database correlation Google does, and > whatever ad serving might leak thru, and object to having a gmail account > on principle? then you dont get write access. anyone can read it anonymously. if you want an entry added, go ask someone who does have write access. -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
Richard Freeman posted on Wed, 10 Mar 2010 18:04:54 -0500 as excerpted: > On 03/10/2010 04:42 PM, Duncan wrote: >> So a gmail account is now considered mandatory for Gentoo devs, at >> least if they want calendar access? >> >> What about those who might think that Google knows enough about them >> with search and the web crawling and database correlation Google does, >> and whatever ad serving might leak thru, and object to having a gmail >> account on principle? >> > Honestly, Google calendar works well enough that I'm not sure that I > like the idea of re-inventing the wheel. Maybe if somebody designed > some kind of open calendar access protocol that was comparable. I guess that's two separate objections. One is simply to the /assumption/ that /everyone/ (well, all Gentoo devs interested in calendar activities, at least) has or at least doesn't object to getting a gmail account. I suppose that's corrected to some degree by the posting itself, but it's an assumption that really shouldn't be taken lightly, IMO. The other is to google /requiring/ a gmail account in the first place, but of course, gentoo really doesn't have much to do with that, except to possibly refuse to use the tools so made available (gratis), which could be argued should be done, but is it worth it in practice? I don't know. The first one is what really hit me here tho. Why the assumption? If it'd have been made explicit that this was something some might have an issue with and they'd simply need to choose, it wouldn't have been so bad as the issue would have been recognized. So it was the simple assumption I found most offensive, and as I said, my post corrected that to some degree, so... -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
On 03/10/2010 04:42 PM, Duncan wrote: So a gmail account is now considered mandatory for Gentoo devs, at least if they want calendar access? What about those who might think that Google knows enough about them with search and the web crawling and database correlation Google does, and whatever ad serving might leak thru, and object to having a gmail account on principle? Honestly, Google calendar works well enough that I'm not sure that I like the idea of re-inventing the wheel. Maybe if somebody designed some kind of open calendar access protocol that was comparable. If you don't like Google tracking all that you do, create a gmail account and don't use it for ANYTHING but Google Calendar. That will greatly limit the amount of database correlation they can do. If somebody has a suggestion for a reasonable multi-user calendaring infrastructure that has reasonably close feature parity and isn't a bear to maintain I'm sure it would be considered. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> said: > So a gmail account is now considered mandatory for Gentoo devs, at least > if they want calendar access? > > What about those who might think that Google knows enough about them with > search and the web crawling and database correlation Google does, and > whatever ad serving might leak thru, and object to having a gmail account > on principle? Then they don't get to see the calendar Seriously though, who cares. If it becomes a problem, we can deal with it then. Until that point, use what we have or implement something that's better. -- Mark Loeser email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org email - mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://www.halcy0n.com signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item
On 10 March 2010 18:36, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: > Almost everybody has at least 1 package installed which supports both Python 2 > and Python 3 and depends on dev-lang/python without version specification, > so Python 3 would be pulled into dependency graph, The problem is that we want to prevent that from happening. Or at the very least advise our users that they should mask python-3* unless they want it to be pulled in. Cheers, -- Ben de Groot Gentoo Linux developer (qt, media, lxde, desktop-misc) __
Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?
On 10 March 2010 19:50, Sebastian Pipping wrote: > On 03/10/10 14:59, Ben de Groot wrote: >> I think it would be better to have it all happen on the same day. > The thing is bugday will soon not be thin anymore: it will require all > the attention of all online devs: there weill be no time to do bumps > that need your brain in parallel. If and when that happens, we can reevaluate and adjust accordingly. Until such time, it will be easier to have developers commit to one set day a month rather than two. Cheers, -- Ben de Groot Gentoo Linux developer (qt, media, lxde, desktop-misc) __
[gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
Mike Frysinger posted on Wed, 10 Mar 2010 07:45:21 -0500 as excerpted: > the front page of http://gentoo.org/ now links to a Google Calendar (see > side bar). this has been around for a while, but it seems it's been > more of an "underground" thing, so it's time to raise its awareness. > > like other aspects of Gentoo, all Gentoo developers have access to it to > add their own events. anything Gentoo related may be added of course ! > meetings, events, scheduled package events, etc... > > the access step requires a bit of help though -- simply e-mail me off > list your gmail account and we can get you set up. once you have > access, you may easily pass it on to other Gentoo peeps. So a gmail account is now considered mandatory for Gentoo devs, at least if they want calendar access? What about those who might think that Google knows enough about them with search and the web crawling and database correlation Google does, and whatever ad serving might leak thru, and object to having a gmail account on principle? -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New eclass for x11 packages
Dne 03/10/2010 08:40 PM, Dawid Węgliński napsal(a): > On Wednesday 10 March 2010 15:13:40 Tomáš Chvátal wrote: >> As last step i fixed issue with circular dependencies. >> So please speak-up now because if no complains are sent, i will add this >> eclass in 5 hours into main tree. >> >> For the eclass see attachment. >> >> Tomas > > 5 hours? :o > First mail was 18.2. So just asking if anything has something really really urgent that might stop inclusion. :] Tom signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New eclass for x11 packages
On Wednesday 10 March 2010 15:13:40 Tomáš Chvátal wrote: > As last step i fixed issue with circular dependencies. > So please speak-up now because if no complains are sent, i will add this > eclass in 5 hours into main tree. > > For the eclass see attachment. > > Tomas 5 hours? :o -- Cheers Dawid Węgliński
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
On 2010.03.10 12:45, Mike Frysinger wrote: > the front page of http://gentoo.org/ now links to a Google Calendar > (see side > bar). [snip] > > the access step requires a bit of help though -- simply e-mail me off > list > your gmail account and we can get you set up. once you have access, > you may > easily pass it on to other Gentoo peeps. > -mike > Mike, Please add roy.bamf...@googlemail.com -- Regards, Roy Bamford (Neddyseagoon) an member of gentoo-ops forum-mods trustees pgpnqPvDP10A5.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?
On 03/10/10 14:59, Ben de Groot wrote: > I think it would be better to have it all happen on the same day. If those > are easy bumps, they fit very well with bugday. And those devs who > want to work on that, can then join the general bugday mayhem. ;-) > You might be spreading things too thinly otherwise. And even for the > more involved bumps it could be handy to have users around for > testing. Testing is a point, easy bumps are a point to. The thing is bugday will soon not be thin anymore: it will require all the attention of all online devs: there weill be no time to do bumps that need your brain in parallel. To summarize: we have to allow Gentoo to grow or it won't. Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 6:41 AM, Mark Loeser wrote: > Mike Frysinger said: >> On Tuesday 09 March 2010 23:08:24 Sebastian Pipping wrote: >> > We have about 500 bump request open at the moment: >> > https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=bump >> > >> > I assume that quite a few of them would be no big deal to their >> > maintainers in Gentoo. >> > >> > >> > Bugday is occupying the first Saturday of the month: how about bumpday >> > on the third Saturday of the month? First bumpday could be March 20th, >> > 10 days from now. >> > >> > What do you think? >> >> for the maintainer-needed ones, np. for the ones with maintainers, i think >> you need an ack from someone first. > > I don't even think the maintainer-needed ones should be bumped. Who > knows what bugs you are introducing into the tree. This is why things > eventually get treecleaned. > > As Mike said, for ones with maintainers, don't touch them unless you > have explicit permission. We have maintainers for a reason, and if you > don't know the intricacies of the package, you shouldn't be touching it. > You should know how it works, how to test it, and what the normal > problems of a bump are. > > With that being said, I don't really see the point of a bumpday. These > day ideas are ignoring the fact that we don't have enough active developers, > which is the real problem. > We have plenty of developers, the problem is we have too many packages ;p -A > -- > Mark Loeser > email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org > email - mark AT halcy0n DOT com > web - http://www.halcy0n.com > > -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- > Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQFLl6+3CRZPokWLroQRAp07AKDgqdRi1gWsIp0wG+QLIaYEXss5OwCdHNZ6 > Owj8ESEixDWVN03OwJV53EQ= > =F2pI > -END PGP SIGNATURE- > >
Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?
On 03/10/10 15:41, Mark Loeser wrote: > I don't even think the maintainer-needed ones should be bumped. Who > knows what bugs you are introducing into the tree. This is why things > eventually get treecleaned. I purposely wrote "no big deal _to their maintainers_" - I wonder why everyone is so scare about their packages getting touched now :-) The requirements for touching packages shall be as on any other day. For maintainer-needed I wouldn't make such a strong cut, though. > As Mike said, for ones with maintainers, don't touch them unless you > have explicit permission. We have maintainers for a reason, and if you > don't know the intricacies of the package, you shouldn't be touching it. > You should know how it works, how to test it, and what the normal > problems of a bump are. Right. As you say it this way: we have maintainers for another reason too: so someone keeps the package up to date. It's both a right and a duty. > With that being said, I don't really see the point of a bumpday. These > day ideas are ignoring the fact that we don't have enough active developers, > which is the real problem. I assume that many half-active developers would be more active if they were motivated stronger. Bumpday could be another step to reactivate existing developers. But yes, we need more developers. Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item
2010-03-08 22:28:16 William Hubbs napisał(a): > On Fri, Mar 05, 2010 at 04:19:36PM -0800, Zac Medico wrote: > > No, it won't. To prove it, I've just tested with a stable stage3 > > containing portage-2.1.7.x. Here are the steps: > > > > 1) extract stable stage3 and chroot into it > > 2) mkdir /etc/portage && echo "dev-lang/python ~*" >> > > /etc/portage/package.keywords > > 3) Run `emerge -pu --deep=1 portage`: > >These are the packages that would be merged, in order: > > > >Calculating dependencies... done! > >[ebuild UD] sys-apps/sandbox-1.6-r2 [2.2] > >[ebuild UD] app-shells/bash-4.0_p35 [4.0_p37] > >[ebuild U ] dev-lang/python-2.6.4-r1 [2.6.4] > > > > If you try `emerge -puD world` then you will see > > dev-lang/python-3.1.1-r1 pulled in by the unspecific dev-lang/python > > atoms in the cracklib and libxml2 dependencies. However, in > > portage-2.1.7.x (current stable), there is support for > > pseudo-version-ranges in dependencies. This allows you use a > > dependency like > python3, and that will prevent it from getting pulled into the > > According to this, we can fix all of the dependencies in the tree then > stabilize python3 without having any issues, so I would vote for this > route, because it still oinsures that the stable tree will work > together. Almost everybody has at least 1 package installed which supports both Python 2 and Python 3 and depends on dev-lang/python without version specification, so Python 3 would be pulled into dependency graph, so fixing of dependencies doesn't need to block stabilization of Python 3. -- Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?
Le mardi 09 mars 2010 à 22:32 -0600, Nathan Zachary a écrit : > On 09/03/10 22:08, Sebastian Pipping wrote: > > Hello! > > > > > > We have about 500 bump request open at the moment: > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=bump > > > > I assume that quite a few of them would be no big deal to their > > maintainers in Gentoo. For gnome assigned bumps, I can tell all of them have a reason/policy that explains why they are not done yet and I definitively don't want non-maintainer bumps for them. > Not sure that my opinion matters all that much as I'm not currently > doing ebuild work, but I think this idea could really help out the > status of the tree. Attached to it could be a stabilisation day as > well. That I would buy. I often hear users complaining that stable isn't that stable and they try to mix ~arch or completely move to ~arch instead of asking for stablereq. Here too gnome has a policy for some packages but a couple of them can be stabilized independently. Either way the reaction is generally quick. -- Gilles Dartiguelongue Gentoo
Re: [gentoo-dev] The feature patch mess in the webalizer ebuild (and how to deal with it)
Done. Three packages now, webalizer bumped. - app-admin/geolizer - app-admin/webalizer - app-admin/webalizer-xtended I'm 100% sure i broke something, please let me know what it is once you found out ;-) Sebastian
Re: [gentoo-dev] webapp-config needs a new maintainer
On Wed, 10 Mar 2010 16:09:26 +0100 Maciej Mrozowski wrote: > This issue always bothered me. Why do we need exclusive web-app > config application that effectively mirrors what emerge is supposed > to do? I mean installation/removal/updates, and what's the most > important config updates. webapp-config was originally designed as a standalone, distribution independent, multi-os tool (Windows support being a priority) that would operate largely independently of the package manager. It just happened to have been developed on Gentoo first. In the early days it would get up to all kinds of crazy stuff like trying to call 'emerge -C' from within pkg_postinst of an ebuild... Unfortunately, in those days, bypassing Portage was considered easier than extending it. -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] webapp-config needs a new maintainer
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 4:09 PM, Maciej Mrozowski wrote: > On Wednesday 10 of March 2010 07:52:28 Benedikt Böhm wrote: >> On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 4:30 AM, Sebastian Pipping wrote: >> > There are quite a few bugs open for it plus the latest version (1.50.18) >> > is not even in Gentoo but on SourceForge only. >> >> The release on sourceforge is not compatible with the current >> implementation in Gentoo AFAIK. >> >> webapp-config is in a horrible shape and also has several design >> flaws. i wouldn't touch it. that's why i already added an idea to the >> GSoC list for a complete w-c rewrite. i talked to gunnar in 2008 or >> 2009 at chemnitz linux days, and we agreed that w-c needs a rewrite. >> but none of us had/has time to do it. hopefully gsoc can change this >> situation. > > This issue always bothered me. Why do we need exclusive web-app config > application that effectively mirrors what emerge is supposed to do? as you obviously figured the replicated package manager behaviour is for installing apps into multiple vhosts. at first i thought this was a nice idea, but after some time managing webapps with w-c, i really hate it and install most things manually nowadays ;-) > Don't bash me, maybe I'm obviously missing something but I'd really prefer > simpler, Debian-like approach to webapps, so: > - web-apps installed in /usr/share instead of /var/www (is there any benefit > from polluting /var/www with system-managed applications?) > - webapp-specific apache config installed in let's say /etc/apache2/conf.d/ > and included from httpd.conf so that any application works out of the box > (Alias directive may be suitable in example below) i am in favour of debian-like approach too, but i think there are people relying on the w-c approach now, so an optimal solution would be to just make webapp-config optional, but this may be an impossible task, i don't really know. Bene
Re: [gentoo-dev] webapp-config needs a new maintainer
On Wednesday 10 of March 2010 07:52:28 Benedikt Böhm wrote: > Hi! > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 4:30 AM, Sebastian Pipping wrote: > > There are quite a few bugs open for it plus the latest version (1.50.18) > > is not even in Gentoo but on SourceForge only. > > The release on sourceforge is not compatible with the current > implementation in Gentoo AFAIK. > > > So your first task would be a proper bump and a maybe few bug fixes after: > webapp-config is in a horrible shape and also has several design > flaws. i wouldn't touch it. that's why i already added an idea to the > GSoC list for a complete w-c rewrite. i talked to gunnar in 2008 or > 2009 at chemnitz linux days, and we agreed that w-c needs a rewrite. > but none of us had/has time to do it. hopefully gsoc can change this > situation. This issue always bothered me. Why do we need exclusive web-app config application that effectively mirrors what emerge is supposed to do? I mean installation/removal/updates, and what's the most important config updates. I see this solution suboptimal. Don't bash me, maybe I'm obviously missing something but I'd really prefer simpler, Debian-like approach to webapps, so: - web-apps installed in /usr/share instead of /var/www (is there any benefit from polluting /var/www with system-managed applications?) - webapp-specific apache config installed in let's say /etc/apache2/conf.d/ and included from httpd.conf so that any application works out of the box (Alias directive may be suitable in example below) (example entry for phppgadmin:) DirectoryIndex index.php Options +FollowSymLinks AllowOverride None Order deny,allow Allow from all php_flag magic_quotes_gpc Off php_flag track_vars On php_value include_path . That file (apache config) as well as wep-app specific config file (/usr/share/phppgadmin/conf/config.inc.php) would be under config-protect, so any modifications are tracked. It's obviously less flexible than webapp-config (no automatic vhosts handling - it would be installed initially for all vhosts, sure, one can easily configure that), but at least doesn't need webapp-config anymore. -- regards MM
Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?
On Wednesday 10 March 2010 16:41:59 Mark Loeser wrote: > Mike Frysinger said: > > On Tuesday 09 March 2010 23:08:24 Sebastian Pipping wrote: > > > We have about 500 bump request open at the moment: > > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=bump > > > > > > I assume that quite a few of them would be no big deal to their > > > maintainers in Gentoo. > > > > > > > > > Bugday is occupying the first Saturday of the month: how about bumpday > > > on the third Saturday of the month? First bumpday could be March 20th, > > > 10 days from now. > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > for the maintainer-needed ones, np. for the ones with maintainers, i > > think you need an ack from someone first. > > I don't even think the maintainer-needed ones should be bumped. Who > knows what bugs you are introducing into the tree. This is why things > eventually get treecleaned. I run occasionally the maintainer-needed list and bump those packages ( and YES I try to do proper bumps not just renaming the ebuilds ), so yes maintainer-needed package could get some love as well :) -- Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org
Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?
Mike Frysinger said: > On Tuesday 09 March 2010 23:08:24 Sebastian Pipping wrote: > > We have about 500 bump request open at the moment: > > https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=bump > > > > I assume that quite a few of them would be no big deal to their > > maintainers in Gentoo. > > > > > > Bugday is occupying the first Saturday of the month: how about bumpday > > on the third Saturday of the month? First bumpday could be March 20th, > > 10 days from now. > > > > What do you think? > > for the maintainer-needed ones, np. for the ones with maintainers, i think > you need an ack from someone first. I don't even think the maintainer-needed ones should be bumped. Who knows what bugs you are introducing into the tree. This is why things eventually get treecleaned. As Mike said, for ones with maintainers, don't touch them unless you have explicit permission. We have maintainers for a reason, and if you don't know the intricacies of the package, you shouldn't be touching it. You should know how it works, how to test it, and what the normal problems of a bump are. With that being said, I don't really see the point of a bumpday. These day ideas are ignoring the fact that we don't have enough active developers, which is the real problem. -- Mark Loeser email - halcy0n AT gentoo DOT org email - mark AT halcy0n DOT com web - http://www.halcy0n.com signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New eclass for x11 packages
As last step i fixed issue with circular dependencies.
So please speak-up now because if no complains are sent, i will add this
eclass in 5 hours into main tree.
For the eclass see attachment.
Tomas
# Copyright 1999-2010 Gentoo Foundation
# Distributed under the terms of the GNU General Public License v2
# $Header: $
#
# @ECLASS: xorg-2.eclass
# @MAINTAINER:
# x...@gentoo.org
# Author: Tomáš Chvátal
# Author: Donnie Berkholz
# @BLURB: Reduces code duplication in the modularized X11 ebuilds.
# @DESCRIPTION:
# This eclass makes trivial X ebuilds possible for apps, fonts, drivers,
# and more. Many things that would normally be done in various functions
# can be accessed by setting variables instead, such as patching,
# running eautoreconf, passing options to configure and installing docs.
#
# All you need to do in a basic ebuild is inherit this eclass and set
# DESCRIPTION, KEYWORDS and RDEPEND/DEPEND. If your package is hosted
# with the other X packages, you don't need to set SRC_URI. Pretty much
# everything else should be automatic.
GIT_ECLASS=""
if [[ ${PV} == ** ]]; then
GIT_ECLASS="git"
XORG_EAUTORECONF="yes"
SRC_URI=""
fi
# If we're a font package, but not the font.alias one
FONT_ECLASS=""
if [[ ${PN} == font* \
&& ${CATEGORY} = media-fonts \
&& ${PN} != font-alias \
&& ${PN} != font-util ]]; then
# Activate font code in the rest of the eclass
FONT="yes"
FONT_ECLASS="font"
fi
inherit eutils base libtool multilib toolchain-funcs flag-o-matic autotools \
${FONT_ECLASS} ${GIT_ECLASS}
EXPORTED_FUNCTIONS="src_unpack src_compile src_install pkg_postinst pkg_postrm"
case "${EAPI:-0}" in
3) EXPORTED_FUNCTIONS="${EXPORTED_FUNCTIONS} src_prepare src_configure"
;;
*) DEPEND="EAPI-UNSUPPORTED" ;;
esac
# exports must be ALWAYS after inherit
EXPORT_FUNCTIONS ${EXPORTED_FUNCTIONS}
IUSE=""
HOMEPAGE="http://xorg.freedesktop.org/";
# @ECLASS-VARIABLE: XORG_EAUTORECONF
# @DESCRIPTION:
# If set to 'yes' and configure.ac exists, eautoreconf will run. Set
# before inheriting this eclass.
: ${XORG_EAUTORECONF:="no"}
# Set up SRC_URI for individual modular releases
BASE_INDIVIDUAL_URI="http://xorg.freedesktop.org/releases/individual";
# @ECLASS-VARIABLE: MODULE
# @DESCRIPTION:
# The subdirectory to download source from. Possible settings are app,
# doc, data, util, driver, font, lib, proto, xserver. Set above the
# inherit to override the default autoconfigured module.
if [[ -z ${MODULE} ]]; then
MODULE=""
case ${CATEGORY} in
app-doc) MODULE="doc" ;;
media-fonts) MODULE="font";;
x11-apps|x11-wm) MODULE="app" ;;
x11-misc|x11-themes) MODULE="util";;
x11-drivers) MODULE="driver" ;;
x11-base)MODULE="xserver" ;;
x11-proto) MODULE="proto" ;;
x11-libs)MODULE="lib" ;;
esac
fi
if [[ -n ${GIT_ECLASS} ]]; then
EGIT_REPO_URI="git://anongit.freedesktop.org/git/xorg/${MODULE}/${PN}"
else
SRC_URI+=" ${BASE_INDIVIDUAL_URI}/${MODULE}/${P}.tar.bz2"
fi
: ${SLOT:=0}
# Set the license for the package. This can be overridden by setting
# LICENSE after the inherit. Nearly all FreeDesktop-hosted X packages
# are under the MIT license. (This is what Red Hat does in their rpms)
: ${LICENSE=MIT}
# Set up shared dependencies
if [[ ${XORG_EAUTORECONF} != no ]]; then
DEPEND+="
>=sys-devel/libtool-2.2.6a
sys-devel/m4"
# This MUST BE STABLE
if [[ ${PN} != util-macros ]] ; then
DEPEND+=" >=x11-misc/util-macros-1.5.0"
# Required even by xorg-server
[[ ${PN} == "font-util" ]] || DEPEND+="
>=media-fonts/font-util-1.1.1-r1"
fi
WANT_AUTOCONF="latest"
WANT_AUTOMAKE="latest"
fi
if [[ ${FONT} == yes ]]; then
RDEPEND+=" media-fonts/encodings
x11-apps/mkfontscale
x11-apps/mkfontdir"
PDEPEND+=" media-fonts/font-alias"
# @ECLASS-VARIABLE: FONT_DIR
# @DESCRIPTION:
# If you're creating a font package and the suffix of PN is not equal to
# the subdirectory of /usr/share/fonts/ it should install into, set
# FONT_DIR to that directory or directories. Set before inheriting this
# eclass.
[[ -z ${FONT_DIR} ]] && FONT_DIR=${PN##*-}
# Fix case of font directories
FONT_DIR=${FONT_DIR/ttf/TTF}
FONT_DIR=${FONT_DIR/otf/OTF}
FONT_DIR=${FONT_DIR/type1/Type1}
FONT_DIR=${FONT_DIR/speedo/Speedo}
# Set up configure options, wrapped so ebuilds can override if need be
[[ -z ${FONT_OPTIONS} ]] &&
FONT_OPTIONS="--with-fontdir=\"${EPREFIX}/usr/share/fonts/${FONT_DIR}\""
[[ ${PN##*-} = misc || ${PN##*-} = 75dpi || ${PN##*-} =
Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?
On 10 March 2010 06:17, Sebastian Pipping wrote: > On 03/10/10 06:00, Joshua Saddler wrote: >> Bumpdays are otherwise a good idea, though I'm not sure why we need a >> separate day for that in addition to our standard bugdays. > [...] > Also, another day means one more day a month with people working on > Gentoo theoretically. I think it would be better to have it all happen on the same day. If those are easy bumps, they fit very well with bugday. And those devs who want to work on that, can then join the general bugday mayhem. ;-) You might be spreading things too thinly otherwise. And even for the more involved bumps it could be handy to have users around for testing. Cheers, -- Ben de Groot Gentoo Linux developer (qt, media, lxde, desktop-misc) __
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 14:45, Mike Frysinger wrote: > the front page of http://gentoo.org/ now links to a Google Calendar (see > side > bar). this has been around for a while, but it seems it's been more of an > "underground" thing, so it's time to raise its awareness. > > like other aspects of Gentoo, all Gentoo developers have access to it to > add > their own events. anything Gentoo related may be added of course ! > meetings, > events, scheduled package events, etc... > > the access step requires a bit of help though -- simply e-mail me off list > your gmail account and we can get you set up. once you have access, you > may > easily pass it on to other Gentoo peeps. > -mike > I added my gentoo mail to my google account, so it should now work. Please add me :) Thanks a lot, Dror Levin
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 08:18:11AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Wednesday 10 March 2010 07:56:42 Alex Alexander wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 07:45:21AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > > the front page of http://gentoo.org/ now links to a Google Calendar (see > > > side bar). this has been around for a while, but it seems it's been > > > more of an "underground" thing, so it's time to raise its awareness. > > > > > > like other aspects of Gentoo, all Gentoo developers have access to it to > > > add their own events. anything Gentoo related may be added of course ! > > > meetings, events, scheduled package events, etc... > > > > > > the access step requires a bit of help though -- simply e-mail me off > > > list your gmail account and we can get you set up. once you have > > > access, you may easily pass it on to other Gentoo peeps. > > > > excellent idea! thanks for taking the time to do this :) > > sorry, i didnt mean to make it sound like this was my idea ... Diego put it > together originally and it's slowly grown since > > > i've added my gentoo email to my personal google account so you should be > > able to add me using that, could you try? > > google didnt warn when i added, so presumably it worked > -mike it did, thanks -- Alex Alexander :: wired Gentoo Developer www.linuxized.com pgpXOawPoPzEV.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
On Wednesday 10 March 2010 07:56:42 Alex Alexander wrote: > On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 07:45:21AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > the front page of http://gentoo.org/ now links to a Google Calendar (see > > side bar). this has been around for a while, but it seems it's been > > more of an "underground" thing, so it's time to raise its awareness. > > > > like other aspects of Gentoo, all Gentoo developers have access to it to > > add their own events. anything Gentoo related may be added of course ! > > meetings, events, scheduled package events, etc... > > > > the access step requires a bit of help though -- simply e-mail me off > > list your gmail account and we can get you set up. once you have > > access, you may easily pass it on to other Gentoo peeps. > > excellent idea! thanks for taking the time to do this :) sorry, i didnt mean to make it sound like this was my idea ... Diego put it together originally and it's slowly grown since > i've added my gentoo email to my personal google account so you should be > able to add me using that, could you try? google didnt warn when i added, so presumably it worked -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[gentoo-dev] Re: Python 3.1: Stabilization and news item
Hi, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis : > All problems, which were blocking stabilization of Python 3, have > been fixed. Stabilization of Python 3.1.2 is currently scheduled on > 2010-04-19. I'm attaching the news item for Python 3.1. Will add my comments for the whole thread here: As far as I can see, there is no danger to any program as long as Python 3 is not set as system python. As soon as the request is filed I will install it on my stable systems and try it...for some weeks to be absolutely sure nothing happens. Then I have nothing against marking it stable on x86 and will do so. V-Li -- Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode http://gentoo.faulhammer.org/> signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
On Wed, Mar 10, 2010 at 07:45:21AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: > the front page of http://gentoo.org/ now links to a Google Calendar (see side > bar). this has been around for a while, but it seems it's been more of an > "underground" thing, so it's time to raise its awareness. > > like other aspects of Gentoo, all Gentoo developers have access to it to add > their own events. anything Gentoo related may be added of course ! > meetings, > events, scheduled package events, etc... > > the access step requires a bit of help though -- simply e-mail me off list > your gmail account and we can get you set up. once you have access, you may > easily pass it on to other Gentoo peeps. > -mike excellent idea! thanks for taking the time to do this :) i've added my gentoo email to my personal google account so you should be able to add me using that, could you try? thanks, -- Alex Alexander :: wired Gentoo Developer www.linuxized.com pgp0zEFpLLvJM.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Gentoo calendar for tracking Gentoo events
the front page of http://gentoo.org/ now links to a Google Calendar (see side bar). this has been around for a while, but it seems it's been more of an "underground" thing, so it's time to raise its awareness. like other aspects of Gentoo, all Gentoo developers have access to it to add their own events. anything Gentoo related may be added of course ! meetings, events, scheduled package events, etc... the access step requires a bit of help though -- simply e-mail me off list your gmail account and we can get you set up. once you have access, you may easily pass it on to other Gentoo peeps. -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] How about a monthly bumpday?
On Tuesday 09 March 2010 23:08:24 Sebastian Pipping wrote: > We have about 500 bump request open at the moment: > https://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?quicksearch=bump > > I assume that quite a few of them would be no big deal to their > maintainers in Gentoo. > > > Bugday is occupying the first Saturday of the month: how about bumpday > on the third Saturday of the month? First bumpday could be March 20th, > 10 days from now. > > What do you think? for the maintainer-needed ones, np. for the ones with maintainers, i think you need an ack from someone first. -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] The feature patch mess in the webalizer ebuild (and how to deal with it)
> Solution > > 1) Add two new packages to the tree: >- app-admin/geolizer (/usr/bin/geolizer) >- app-admin/webalizer-xtended (/usr/bin/webalizer-xtended) > > 2) Bump webalizer to 2.21 while > - no longer applying either feature patch > - removing use flag "xtended" > - keeping now hollow use flag "geoip" to reduce breakage > > 3) Close related bug 231859 >https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=231859 > > I volunteer to do that. > > Any objections or suggestions? +1 we really should be attempting to keep as close to upstream as possible.
