Re: [gentoo-dev] How to speed up maintenance and other Gentoo work?

2009-03-13 Thread Thilo Bangert
one thing that could perhaps speed up gentoo is specifying at what point 
or what steps are required before it is ok to step on others toes.

we have the QAcanfix keyword, for bugs where QA threatens to just fix 
the bug if the maintainer doesn't react timely... but it appears to be the 
tree could generally move faster, if there was an agreement as to when 
somebody is allowed to fix another maintainers stuff.

if we had a formal process in place, one could always execute on that and 
fix the issue oneself, instead of having the cheap excuse of well, 
slowguy hasnt fixed bug xxx yet, so i cant move.

this process should ideally be very lean and short - as to not discourage 
these type of changes.

kind regards
Thilo




[gentoo-dev] Re: Ideas for a (fast) EAPI=3

2009-03-13 Thread Christian Faulhammer
Hi,

Tiziano Müller dev-z...@gentoo.org:

 Am Montag, den 09.03.2009, 10:06 +0100 schrieb Christian Faulhammer:
  Hi,
  
  Daniel Pielmeier daniel.pielme...@googlemail.com:
  
   2009/3/9 Christian Faulhammer fa...@gentoo.org:
   
 I don't know if there is a bug somewhere (I did not find one),
but what about having the possibility to ask for one out many
USE flags of a dependency.  For example app-misc/gramps needs
dev-lang/python with USE=berkdb or USE=sqlite, but Portage
won't tell the user that he can enable one but always asks for
the first in the || () string.
   
   
   || ( dev-lang/python[berkdb] dev-lang/python[sqlite] )
  
   That's the solution currently and not the optimum.
   
   The only way I found to get around this is to recompile python
   with the new use flags first. Afterwards dependency calculation
   succeeds.
  
 
 Correctly you should probably add a berkdb or sqlite USE flag to
 gramps and then do:
 sqlite? ( dev-lang/python[sqlite] )
 !sqlite? ( dev-lang/python[berkdb] )

 The latest version 3.1 only needs USE=berkdb on Python...so problem
solved for me. :)

V-Li

-- 
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode

URL:http://www.faulhammer.org/


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] Collecting opinions about GLEP 55 and alternatives

2009-03-13 Thread Michael Haubenwallner
(trying to have people understand the idea, not to discuss in this
thread)

On Fri, 2009-03-13 at 06:18 +1300, Alistair Bush wrote:

  As long as we want/have to support PMs lacking EAPI detection in
  '*.ebuild' to mask ebuilds with unknown EAPI, each approach to add EAPI
  to an '*.ebuild' must be hackish. So we can try to find the least ugly
  hack, or we need to change the extension.

 inherit eapi 4
  
  Because non-compliant PM's already quit because of (missing or dying)
  eapi.eclass, there is no need to have a '4.eclass'.
 
 How would the 4.eclass determine whether the package manager actually 
 supports the eapi?
 
 inherit is a function remember so any special parsing will not change 
 the fact the the inherit function will be called.
 Will then need to determine whether there is actually a PM that doesn't 
 support the eclasses EAPI and then die.

The most important point here I thought everyone is aware of:
inherit() is a function provided *by* PM - or am I wrong here?

So it already *knows* to handle the 'eapi' argument as special when the
PM is compliant, to not read *any* eclass for this one inherit-call when
the ebuild gets sourced (assuming selected eapi specifies to
shell-source the ebuild).
And non-compliant PMs would mask the ebuild 'by corruption', because of
either missing or globalscope-dying eapi.eclass, whatever can be made
look more obvious to the user.

 What are the implications of calling inherit multiple times within an 
 ebuild?

A compliant PM does allow this if the selected eapi specifies to inherit
eclasses, a non-compliant PM will not come to a subsequent inherit call
after 'inherit eapi'.

 Im sorry,  but this just sounds like a HACK, and a hacky hack at that.

Agreed (see above).
Again - the only reason for this idea is to eventually allow for keeping
the '.ebuild' extension, because EAPI 0 does not allow for specifying
*any* eapi at all. It just forces PM to provide inherit() as the only
PM-defined global-scope function. So whatever we try, specifying an eapi
inside an .ebuild *without* changing the extension *will* be a hack,
just more ore less ugly.

/haubi/
-- 
Michael Haubenwallner
Gentoo on a different level




Re: [gentoo-dev] How to speed up maintenance and other Gentoo work?

2009-03-13 Thread Grant Goodyear
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 3:24 AM, Thilo Bangert bang...@gentoo.org wrote:
 one thing that could perhaps speed up gentoo is specifying at what point
 or what steps are required before it is ok to step on others toes.

 we have the QAcanfix keyword, for bugs where QA threatens to just fix
 the bug if the maintainer doesn't react timely... but it appears to be the
 tree could generally move faster, if there was an agreement as to when
 somebody is allowed to fix another maintainers stuff.

 if we had a formal process in place, one could always execute on that and
 fix the issue oneself, instead of having the cheap excuse of well,
 slowguy hasnt fixed bug xxx yet, so i cant move.

 this process should ideally be very lean and short - as to not discourage
 these type of changes.

Heh.

I always liked the old policy: Don't break stuff.  If you're sure you
know what you're doing, and you're not going to break stuff, then do
what needs to be done.

-g2boojum-
-- 
Grant Goodyear  
web: http://www.grantgoodyear.org   
e-mail: gr...@grantgoodyear.org



[gentoo-dev] gentoo KVM images now available :)

2009-03-13 Thread alex . alexander

Hello :)

I've created some KVM images to aid Gentoo Developers and
the KDE herd in ebuild development and maintainance.

Two images are currently available: [1]
an X-less ~x86 with various tools preinstalled [like layman]
and
a copy of the first ~x86 with kdebase-meta[kdeprefix] and a
few other packages installed on top of it

The portage tree is in a separate image, along with binary
packages of most stuff installed in the two images.
(a bz2 of the tree is in /usr just in case)

The images are available at dev.gentooexperimental.org [1].
Please read the README [2] for instructions and more information :)

An image with -kdeprefix kde is also en route.

I would really appreciate feedback on the images:
* things you liked
* things missing
* things you'd do differently
either through these mailing lists or in freenode/#gentoo-kde
so I can make future revisions better and more useful!

Regards,
Alex Alexander (wired)
Gentoo KDE Team Herd Tester

[1] http://dev.gentooexperimental.org/~wired/kvm/
[2] http://dev.gentooexperimental.org/~wired/kvm/README.txt

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


[gentoo-dev] Re: Developer Retirements

2009-03-13 Thread Duncan
Doug Goldstein car...@gentoo.org posted
eafa4c130903101013s3bb64404g9e65ca0fc8973...@mail.gmail.com, excerpted
below, on  Tue, 10 Mar 2009 12:13:36 -0500:

 So really an effective solution might be for the recruiters/retirement
 staff to change a user's shell with a script that spits out a message
 that says something to the effect of:
 
 You have been inactive for a while. Please contact recruiters to
 re-enable your account. This was done as a security measure.
 
 Obviously a little friendlier would be better but everyone gets the
 gist. That'll prevent them from logging into infra boxes and from being
 able to do a commit.

That does seem to take care of the security side (assuming the cracker 
can't simply contact recruiters and get reenabled, no verification), yes.

That's my biggest concern.  However, upon reading rane's replies, his 
point that if retaking the quizes is hard, they probably DO need the 
refresh, makes a lot of sense to me as well.

But even tho the knowledge aspect applies to every returning dev while 
the security aspect above is (hopefully) low chance, lack of up-to-date 
tech and policy knowledge (as addressed by the quizes) at worst breaks a 
tree for a few hours or a package for perhaps a few months.  If Gentoo 
devs as a group are willing to live with that, so am I as a Gentoo user 
and Gentoo system sysadmin.  It's thus an entirely different level of 
discussion than that of a relatively lower chance but much higher damage 
potential security breach, which every Gentoo user (aka Gentoo system 
sysadmin) therefore has an interest in.

-- 
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




[gentoo-dev] Re: devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))

2009-03-13 Thread Duncan
Thilo Bangert bang...@gentoo.org posted
200903101315.52142.bang...@gentoo.org, excerpted below, on  Tue, 10 Mar
2009 13:15:36 +0100:

 the presumption seems to be, that as a dev one has to be available via
 IRC. it has long been my feeling that Gentoo as a project could realize
 more of its potential by better integrating people who dont do IRC.

This has bothered me too.  Some people simply don't do well in 
immediate (textual) communication mode.  They much prefer the minute-
resolution mode of email/web-form/newsgroup to the second-resolution mode 
of IRC/IM.  I'm one such person.[1]  As a result, I have experienced a 
high barrier to getting further involved with Gentoo, toward becoming an 
AT or dev.

That may be simply the way things must be (after all, to take an extreme 
example, who could reasonably argue that snail mail contributions could 
even work at all for more than the one-off, for something like Gentoo), 
but I can't say I see it that way.  Even in instances where the second-
resolution of IRC really does work better, say meetings, a mixed-mode 
approach much as the council has recently taken, with most of the 
discussion via minute/hour resolution mailing list leaving the official 
IRC meetings as ideally little more than formalizing the vote, arguably 
works far better.

---
[1] I like to be able to type up my message, look at it, revise a bit 
where necessary, then send, on second-resolution media such as IRC/IM, 
that's hardly possible as it looks like dead air from the other end 
when there's 2-3 participants and the discussion has usually long moved 
on by the time the submission is ready, in larger groups.

-- 
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




[gentoo-dev] Re: devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))

2009-03-13 Thread Christian Faulhammer
Hi,

Duncan 1i5t5.dun...@cox.net:

 Thilo Bangert bang...@gentoo.org posted
 200903101315.52142.bang...@gentoo.org, excerpted below, on  Tue, 10
 Mar 2009 13:15:36 +0100:
 
  the presumption seems to be, that as a dev one has to be available
  via IRC. it has long been my feeling that Gentoo as a project could
  realize more of its potential by better integrating people who dont
  do IRC.
 
 This has bothered me too.  Some people simply don't do well in 
 immediate (textual) communication mode.  They much prefer the
 minute- resolution mode of email/web-form/newsgroup to the
 second-resolution mode of IRC/IM.  I'm one such person.[1]  As a
 result, I have experienced a high barrier to getting further involved
 with Gentoo, toward becoming an AT or dev.

 I am a dev with sparse internet connectivity and seldomly found on
IRC...and even as an AT I chose to stay away from IRC.  So I see few
problems there.

V-Li

-- 
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode

URL:http://www.faulhammer.org/


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))

2009-03-13 Thread Thomas Anderson
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 03:37:28PM +, Duncan wrote:
 Thilo Bangert bang...@gentoo.org posted
 200903101315.52142.bang...@gentoo.org, excerpted below, on  Tue, 10 Mar
 2009 13:15:36 +0100:
 
  the presumption seems to be, that as a dev one has to be available via
  IRC. it has long been my feeling that Gentoo as a project could realize
  more of its potential by better integrating people who dont do IRC.
 
 This has bothered me too.  Some people simply don't do well in 
 immediate (textual) communication mode.  They much prefer the minute-
 resolution mode of email/web-form/newsgroup to the second-resolution mode 
 of IRC/IM.  I'm one such person.[1]  As a result, I have experienced a 
 high barrier to getting further involved with Gentoo, toward becoming an 
 AT or dev.

There are many devs who rarely venture on IRC, yet do a lot of good
work. As far as ATs go, it's not a necessity to be on IRC; pretty much
the only communication that occurs in #-amd64-dev is coordination of
stabilization efforts and goofing off(and the occasional xfce dev talks
:p).
-- 
-
Thomas Anderson
Gentoo Developer
/
Areas of responsibility:
AMD64, Secretary to the Gentoo Council
-




Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))

2009-03-13 Thread Donnie Berkholz
On 15:37 Fri 13 Mar , Duncan wrote:
 Thilo Bangert bang...@gentoo.org posted
 200903101315.52142.bang...@gentoo.org, excerpted below, on  Tue, 10 Mar
 2009 13:15:36 +0100:
 
  the presumption seems to be, that as a dev one has to be available via
  IRC. it has long been my feeling that Gentoo as a project could realize
  more of its potential by better integrating people who dont do IRC.
 
 This has bothered me too.  Some people simply don't do well in 
 immediate (textual) communication mode.  They much prefer the minute-
 resolution mode of email/web-form/newsgroup to the second-resolution mode 
 of IRC/IM.  I'm one such person.[1]  As a result, I have experienced a 
 high barrier to getting further involved with Gentoo, toward becoming an 
 AT or dev.

One nice thing about IRC is that people get equal talking time. It's 
very hard to overwhelm anyone with text.

-- 
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Developer, Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com


pgpSelgm1BPKi.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))

2009-03-13 Thread Donnie Berkholz
On 19:06 Wed 11 Mar , Thilo Bangert wrote:
   the presumption seems to be, that as a dev one has to be available 
   via IRC. it has long been my feeling that Gentoo as a project 
   could realize more of its potential by better integrating people 
   who dont do IRC.

I think IRC helps to build a more tightly knit community and, because of 
this, is very important to Gentoo. The less close we are as a community, 
the more free we feel to be hostile because we don't see the folks on 
the other end of the big tube as real people. It's much like a technique 
that militaries use during wars to de-personalize the enemy, except with 
the Internet, we start that way and have to apply effort to grow closer.

-- 
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Developer, Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com


pgpFecMI9zSAM.pgp
Description: PGP signature


[gentoo-dev] Tcl/Tk multi-slot testing

2009-03-13 Thread Federico Ferri
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

I've done some work on providing multi-slot Tcl and Tk packages.
you can find it on my overlay [1]

this work consists basiaclly of:
1) modifying tcl/tk ebuilds for install stuff with
- --prefix=/usr/tcl/${SLOT}
 and merging all the ebuilds code into the tcltk eclass
2) provide a tcltk eselect module for switching the active tcltk version

pro:
this would allow less painful unmasking and stabilizing of tcl/tk
packages, so users can have a tcl runtime of the 21st century =))
tcltk apps that are less vital (i.e. have not ported to newer
runtimes) could still live on a system using the tcltk switcher

potential issues:
this could become troublesome if there is a tcl extension installed,
and is needed both for tcl 8.5 and tcl 8.6. it should be reinstalled
after each 'eselect tcltk set ...'


btw, on a different topic: the number of bugs on tcltk (8.5) has
lowered a bit.
maybe it's time to unmask it and have package maintainers fix the
outdated apps?


[1] http://overlays.gentoo.org/dev/mescalinum
* uninstall previous versions of tcl/tk if you are testing this, as
slotmoves are not possible for overlays
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkm6oUgACgkQV/B5axfzrPvBWACffga+Jv3492sFXpojSChujoR4
/j8An1SNh/Ruwt3JMG7JWHfwCKj/2mJc
=5Q1Q
-END PGP SIGNATURE-




Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo KVM images now available :)

2009-03-13 Thread Donnie Berkholz
On 15:53 Fri 13 Mar , alex.alexan...@gmail.com wrote:
 I've created some KVM images to aid Gentoo Developers and
 the KDE herd in ebuild development and maintainance.

 I would really appreciate feedback on the images:
 * things you liked
 * things missing
 * things you'd do differently
 either through these mailing lists or in freenode/#gentoo-kde
 so I can make future revisions better and more useful!

Cool! How did you make these? Can you make them with Catalyst?

-- 
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Developer, Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com


pgpDtqiVQcvoi.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo KVM images now available :)

2009-03-13 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
Dne pátek 13 Březen 2009 19:19:00 Donnie Berkholz napsal(a):
 Cool! How did you make these? Can you make them with Catalyst?
Actualy i think alex did them as normal gentoo instalation :]. But instead of 
installing onto normal pc he installed into kvm image.

When i tried catalyst few months back it was quite broken for few cases it is 
working fine nowdays? (No flame please i will be really happy to hear that 
catalyst is nowdays robust and working as expected.)

Tomas


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Re: [gentoo-dev] devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))

2009-03-13 Thread AllenJB

Donnie Berkholz wrote:

On 19:06 Wed 11 Mar , Thilo Bangert wrote:
the presumption seems to be, that as a dev one has to be available 
via IRC. it has long been my feeling that Gentoo as a project 
could realize more of its potential by better integrating people 
who dont do IRC.


I think IRC helps to build a more tightly knit community and, because of 
this, is very important to Gentoo. The less close we are as a community, 
the more free we feel to be hostile because we don't see the folks on 
the other end of the big tube as real people. It's much like a technique 
that militaries use during wars to de-personalize the enemy, except with 
the Internet, we start that way and have to apply effort to grow closer.




While it may be tight nit, there's the danger that it's so tight no one 
else can get in, so to speak.


I don't think anyone's saying anything like no more IRC. What I at 
least am advocating is that what goes on on IRC gets summarized 
somewhere in addition. As I said before, this not only helps keep a 
log of what goes on for future generations, but also allows others 
(users and devs who don't have time to follow everything) to look in and 
follow what the devs are doing more easily.


I think that this would ultimately help make Gentoo development more 
visible and more accessible, ultimately leading to an increased 
conversion of users to contributors, if not users to devs.


AllenJB



Re: [gentoo-dev] devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))

2009-03-13 Thread Alec Warner
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 11:24 AM, AllenJB gentoo-li...@allenjb.me.uk wrote:
 Donnie Berkholz wrote:

 On 19:06 Wed 11 Mar , Thilo Bangert wrote:

 the presumption seems to be, that as a dev one has to be available via
 IRC. it has long been my feeling that Gentoo as a project could realize 
 more
 of its potential by better integrating people who dont do IRC.

 I think IRC helps to build a more tightly knit community and, because of
 this, is very important to Gentoo. The less close we are as a community, the
 more free we feel to be hostile because we don't see the folks on the other
 end of the big tube as real people. It's much like a technique that
 militaries use during wars to de-personalize the enemy, except with the
 Internet, we start that way and have to apply effort to grow closer.


 While it may be tight nit, there's the danger that it's so tight no one else
 can get in, so to speak.

 I don't think anyone's saying anything like no more IRC. What I at least
 am advocating is that what goes on on IRC gets summarized somewhere in
 addition. As I said before, this not only helps keep a log of what goes on
 for future generations, but also allows others (users and devs who don't
 have time to follow everything) to look in and follow what the devs are
 doing more easily.

I think that summarizing IRC is insane.  Remember we barely got
summaries of council meetings (which are at a fixed time and date)
until we got a secretary devoted explicitly to that task.  Maybe more
teams should take up the meeting model; that way non-IRC folks can
either be on IRC for meeting times only, or peruse the meeting notes
afterwards if they are interested in what happened.


 I think that this would ultimately help make Gentoo development more visible
 and more accessible, ultimately leading to an increased conversion of users
 to contributors, if not users to devs.

 AllenJB





Re: [gentoo-dev] devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))

2009-03-13 Thread Thilo Bangert
Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org said:
 On 19:06 Wed 11 Mar , Thilo Bangert wrote:
the presumption seems to be, that as a dev one has to be
available via IRC. it has long been my feeling that Gentoo as a
project could realize more of its potential by better integrating
people who dont do IRC.

 I think IRC helps to build a more tightly knit community and, because
 of this, is very important to Gentoo. The less close we are as a
 community, the more free we feel to be hostile because we don't see the
 folks on the other end of the big tube as real people. It's much like a
 technique that militaries use during wars to de-personalize the enemy,
 except with the Internet, we start that way and have to apply effort to
 grow closer.

so you say, that presumption is ok? i agree 100% with what you say, but it 
doesnt (at least directly) address my concern. i think IRC is an excellent 
medium - the problems i see, though, are related to the fact that IRC 
requires all stakeholders to be available at the time of discussion. for a 
multitude of reasons this can almost never be guaranteed. also, even if we 
did have IRC logs, the signal to noise ratio on IRC is devastating (at 
least in my experience).

for those reasons, i would like to see more bridge-building between the 
worlds. i didnt want to give examples, as i dont like pointing fingers, 
but here it is: relengs discussion to switch to weekly autobuilds. 
presumably there hast been one, but i cant find it in the list archives. 
not on gentoo-...@g.o and not on gentoo-rel...@g.o - where else should i 
look? IRC perhaps - well, where are the logs? interestingly, the 
announcement of the switch has a pointer to the releng project page, which 
does not even mention the IRC channel.

from looking at the releng mailing list one gets the impression that 
releng in gentoo is dead. its not - i know and am greatful for the hard 
work everybody in releng puts in - but it makes the releng project much 
less accessible. to follow, or contribute.

thanks for listening
kind regards
Thilo



signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Re: [gentoo-dev] devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))

2009-03-13 Thread Tomáš Chvátal
Dne pátek 13 Březen 2009 19:52:59 Alec Warner napsal(a):

 I think that summarizing IRC is insane.  Remember we barely got
 summaries of council meetings (which are at a fixed time and date)
 until we got a secretary devoted explicitly to that task.  Maybe more
 teams should take up the meeting model; that way non-IRC folks can
 either be on IRC for meeting times only, or peruse the meeting notes
 afterwards if they are interested in what happened.


Well we are quite able to handle it on kde meetings, so users get what are we 
working on (or at least the big parts). :]
But i am pretty sure that it would be nice to have some tool where we put 
major stuff we are on so others can see :]

Tomas


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Re: [gentoo-dev] devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))

2009-03-13 Thread Thilo Bangert

 I think that summarizing IRC is insane. 

and there is no need for it either. as stated elsewhere much of what is 
going on on IRC is 'goofing off' - for which IRC is excellent. (heck - i 
should goof off more often :-)

i dont mind the day-to-day work stuff going on on IRC exclusively - but 
when discussions about the future directions of a project and the decision 
making process are held on IRC exclusively, then that is not helpful in 
attracting new blood. for one because there is no history but also because 
they may not use IRC that much.

 Remember we barely got
 summaries of council meetings (which are at a fixed time and date)
 until we got a secretary devoted explicitly to that task.  

 Maybe more
 teams should take up the meeting model; that way non-IRC folks can
 either be on IRC for meeting times only, or peruse the meeting notes
 afterwards if they are interested in what happened.

yeah - the kde team is leading the way here. granted - this model may not 
work for everybody...

regards
Thilo




signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.


Re: [gentoo-dev] Ideas for a (fast) EAPI=3

2009-03-13 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 08:49:16 +0100
Tiziano Müller dev-z...@gentoo.org wrote:
 So I think it's time for a short eapi bump with some distinct
 improvements:

Some more small candidates to discuss:

* How would people feel about killing off automagic RDEPEND=DEPEND
  behaviour?

* Officially kill off AA. It's not useful.

* Kill off KV. This should be eclass territory.

* Ban dohtml, which is weird, and add '-u dir' to dodoc, so you
  can use dodoc -r -u html blah instead.

* We currently have .xz / .tar.xz support for unpack down for EAPI 3.
  Am I right in thinking there's nothing stable that can handle .xz
  files?

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))

2009-03-13 Thread Michael Higgins
On Fri, 13 Mar 2009 11:09:04 -0700
Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org wrote:

 On 19:06 Wed 11 Mar , Thilo Bangert wrote:
the presumption seems to be, that as a dev one has to be
available via IRC. it has long been my feeling that Gentoo as a
project could realize more of its potential by better
integrating people who dont do IRC.
 
 I think IRC helps to build a more tightly knit community and, because
 of this, is very important to Gentoo. The less close we are as a
 community, the more free we feel to be hostile because we don't see
 the folks on the other end of the big tube as real people. It's much
 like a technique that militaries use during wars to de-personalize
 the enemy, except with the Internet, we start that way and have to
 apply effort to grow closer.
 

This is an interesting point you raise, though I don't think it applies in this 
case.

I believe, rather, that the issue is the 'community' appears more like a 
'cabal' when the discussions take place on #IRC and therefore aren't available 
in public archives.

Even if they are, an IRC log is a *terrible* way to document an issue.

Since the discussion is Re: '*DEVS* on IRC', I think the problem should be 
clear:

You all get more closely knit, perhaps, yet appear to do more *in secret*. 
There is *no way* to find out what is going on, without becoming part of the 
problem... by asking, or lurking, on IRC. This is bad.

Example? After months of searching for a reason, after seeing many apparently 
random updates to a previously stable tree of perl modules, I happen to keep an 
IRC session log which shows with this FSCKING USEFUL TIDBIT:

... no motivated developers. the perl team completely vanished.

Anyone considering using Gentoo should KNOW that, if they use perl in any 
substantive way. Wouldn't you agree?

Now, why isn't there a discussion about this on the gentoo-perl mailing list? 
Not even a post from some DEV with a cry for HELP? If there's a problem, *who* 
is doing *what* to address it, and *where*? 

Oh, right, there's *some* discussion on IRC... 

Anyway, it's just one example. In this case, I'd be glad to see *some* 
documentation of the (apparent total) collapse of the 'perl team' and what is 
being proposed to fix the problem, *without* having to become part of the cabal.

Since there is a mailing list dedicated for discussions of perl and gentoo, 
that seems the most logical place to air the dirty laundry and announce/discuss 
the plan for moving forward. IMO.

Cheers,

-- 
 |\  /||   |  ~ ~  
 | \/ ||---|  `|` ?
 ||ichael  |   |iggins\^ / 
 michael.higgins[at]evolone[dot]org



[gentoo-dev] Re: devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))

2009-03-13 Thread Duncan
Michael Higgins li...@evolone.org posted
20090313140558.048bb...@lappy.evolone.org, excerpted below, on  Fri, 13
Mar 2009 14:05:58 -0700:

 Example? After months of searching for a reason, after seeing many
 apparently random updates to a previously stable tree of perl modules, I
 happen to keep an IRC session log which shows with this FSCKING USEFUL
 TIDBIT:
 
 ... no motivated developers. the perl team completely vanished.
 
 Anyone considering using Gentoo should KNOW that, if they use perl in
 any substantive way. Wouldn't you agree?

Indeed.

 Anyway, it's just one example. In this case, I'd be glad to see *some*
 documentation of the (apparent total) collapse of the 'perl team' and
 what is being proposed to fix the problem, *without* having to become
 part of the cabal.

And thanks for providing a bit of that documentation here.  That is in 
fact one of the reasons I follow this list, and it has in fact forewarned 
me of several issues some time before I had to deal with them.  I'm thus 
very happy to have this list to follow. =:^)

But I had seen absolutely nothing on the above, the perl team basically 
disappearing, until your documentation of it in your post.  It would have 
been nice to have seen a bit on the list about it previously, ideally 
from a dev noting the problem and asking what we can do about it.  But 
given nothing from them (except apparently on IRC), I'll take what I can 
get, from a user, sometime *after* I should have known about it, as a 
Gentoo user concerned enough to actually follow the dev list to *get* 
such information. =:^(

So thanks. Dev or nodev, I'm glad there are folks like you around!  =:^)

-- 
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] Ideas for a (fast) EAPI=3

2009-03-13 Thread Tiziano Müller
Am Freitag, den 13.03.2009, 20:11 + schrieb Ciaran McCreesh:
 On Sun, 08 Mar 2009 08:49:16 +0100
 Tiziano Müller dev-z...@gentoo.org wrote:
  So I think it's time for a short eapi bump with some distinct
  improvements:
 
 Some more small candidates to discuss:
 
 * How would people feel about killing off automagic RDEPEND=DEPEND
   behaviour?
 
 * Officially kill off AA. It's not useful.
Never used it, thus ++

 
 * Kill off KV. This should be eclass territory.
++

 
 * Ban dohtml, which is weird, and add '-u dir' to dodoc, so you
   can use dodoc -r -u html blah instead.
But then we shouldn't introduce doexample, but use dodoc -r -u
examples instead.
I liked that dohtml can filter based on file endings, this made it in
the past easier to install html docs.
So, if we could have something like:
  filter_files -t web docs/ | dodoc -r -u html
that would be fine :-)

 
 * We currently have .xz / .tar.xz support for unpack down for EAPI 3.
   Am I right in thinking there's nothing stable that can handle .xz
   files?
 
As far as I know, but vapier is probably the expert here.




signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil


Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo KVM images now available :)

2009-03-13 Thread Robin H. Johnson
On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 07:22:05PM +0100, Tomáš Chvátal wrote:
 When i tried catalyst few months back it was quite broken for few cases it is 
 working fine nowdays? (No flame please i will be really happy to hear that 
 catalyst is nowdays robust and working as expected.)
If you can break it while not feeding it garbage (GIGO applies
otherwise), then I think releng would like to hear from you, since it's
running near daily on some releng box for the autobuilds that have been
going out for a couple of months now.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux Developer  Infra Guy
E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85


pgpzaCdhoWbOF.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo KVM images now available :)

2009-03-13 Thread wired

Thomas nailed it, I created the clean one from scratch, then cp'd it and 
created the kde one on top of it.

More/updated images will pop up sooner or later too =]

--
| Alex Alexander (wired)
| Gentoo KDE Team Herd Tester
|
| Gentoo'd :: http://linuxized.blogspot.com
\

On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 20:19, Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org wrote:

On 15:53 Fri 13 Mar     , alex.alexan...@gmail.com wrote:

I've created some KVM images to aid Gentoo Developers and
the KDE herd in ebuild development and maintainance.



I would really appreciate feedback on the images:
* things you liked
* things missing
* things you'd do differently
either through these mailing lists or in freenode/#gentoo-kde
so I can make future revisions better and more useful!


Cool! How did you make these? Can you make them with Catalyst?

--
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Developer, Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com





signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))

2009-03-13 Thread Donnie Berkholz
On 14:05 Fri 13 Mar , Michael Higgins wrote:
 I believe, rather, that the issue is the 'community' appears more like 
 a 'cabal' when the discussions take place on #IRC and therefore aren't 
 available in public archives.

This is kind of like saying: I don't read the Gentoo forums, so 
everything that happens on the forums is a cabal. When you specifically 
choose not to participate in an entire method of communication, it's 
your choice to leave yourself out. A cabal is totally different -- it 
doesn't give you that choice by never even telling you there is a place 
where discussions happen.

 Even if they are, an IRC log is a *terrible* way to document an issue.

I agree. So is a mailing-list archive that is also never summarized. 
It's not the location that makes it a problem, it's the volume of 
information and the lack of a summary of important decisions or long, 
important discussions.

 You all get more closely knit, perhaps, yet appear to do more *in 
 secret*. There is *no way* to find out what is going on, without 
 becoming part of the problem... by asking, or lurking, on IRC. This is 
 bad.

I can't agree with your assertion that IRC is secretive, is a problem or 
is bad. I think completely the opposite in all cases. Secretive would be 
a closed IRC network that we didn't tell non-developers about or didn't 
allow them to join.

-- 
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Developer, Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com


pgp9P5lI46Pn0.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Re: [gentoo-dev] devs on IRC (was :Regen2 ( was QA Overlay Layout support ))

2009-03-13 Thread Donnie Berkholz
On 19:56 Fri 13 Mar , Thilo Bangert wrote:
 Donnie Berkholz dberkh...@gentoo.org said:
  On 19:06 Wed 11 Mar , Thilo Bangert wrote:
 the presumption seems to be, that as a dev one has to be 
 available via IRC. it has long been my feeling that Gentoo as 
 a project could realize more of its potential by better 
 integrating people who dont do IRC.
 
  I think IRC helps to build a more tightly knit community and, 
  because of this, is very important to Gentoo. The less close we are 
  as a community, the more free we feel to be hostile because we don't 
  see the folks on the other end of the big tube as real people. It's 
  much like a technique that militaries use during wars to 
  de-personalize the enemy, except with the Internet, we start that 
  way and have to apply effort to grow closer.
 
 so you say, that presumption is ok?

Honestly, yes. Gentoo development (and users too!) is a very 
IRC-centered community, and I think IRC is one of the reasons it is a 
strong development community. Parts of the forums are similarly critical 
to building a strong user community (Gentoo Chat, Off the Wall), as is 
the Gentoo Universe for developers.

IRC is a lot like this mailing list in some ways. Even as developers, 
you can choose not to participate, and consequently you have to deal 
with the decisions you chose not to be part of making when you hear 
about them after the fact on -dev-announce.

 i agree 100% with what you say, but it doesnt (at least directly) 
 address my concern. i think IRC is an excellent medium - the problems 
 i see, though, are related to the fact that IRC requires all 
 stakeholders to be available at the time of discussion. for a 
 multitude of reasons this can almost never be guaranteed. also, even 
 if we did have IRC logs, the signal to noise ratio on IRC is 
 devastating (at least in my experience).

I agree that all stakeholders (to use your term) ought to participate 
before a decision, but even on IRC this doesn't mean they all have to be 
present simultaneously. In my experience, a few stakeholders are around 
at a time, and they're able to have a lot of very fast real-time 
discussion that would be vastly slowed down by a mailing list. Then a 
few hours later, maybe a couple of the same people will be around and a 
couple new stakeholders. The new ones catch up and have some more fast 
back-and-forth.

 for those reasons, i would like to see more bridge-building between 
 the worlds. i didnt want to give examples, as i dont like pointing 
 fingers, but here it is: relengs discussion to switch to weekly 
 autobuilds. presumably there hast been one, but i cant find it in the 
 list archives. not on gentoo-...@g.o and not on gentoo-rel...@g.o - 
 where else should i look? IRC perhaps - well, where are the logs? 
 interestingly, the announcement of the switch has a pointer to the 
 releng project page, which does not even mention the IRC channel.

I agree that important decisions deserve summaries instead of hiding out 
anywhere, whether it's buried in IRC discussions or archived 
mailing-list threads!

-- 
Thanks,
Donnie

Donnie Berkholz
Developer, Gentoo Linux
Blog: http://dberkholz.wordpress.com


pgp46Fikrtdic.pgp
Description: PGP signature