[gentoo-dev] Automated Package Removal and Addition Tracker, for the week ending 2011-05-08 23h59 UTC
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed from the tree, for the week ending 2011-05-08 23h59 UTC. Removals: app-editors/easyedit2011-05-07 15:57:55 hattya Additions: gnustep-libs/dbuskit2011-05-02 13:41:54 voyageur dev-lua/lua-zlib2011-05-02 16:42:39 djc net-mail/mhonarc-gentoo 2011-05-02 22:21:32 tampakrap media-gfx/cutycapt 2011-05-03 04:11:10 mattm www-client/opera-next 2011-05-03 19:42:43 jer dev-python/cosmolopy2011-05-03 22:12:43 bicatali sci-libs/spr2011-05-04 00:15:31 bicatali app-vim/gitv2011-05-04 08:23:23 radhermit app-vim/vimcalc 2011-05-04 11:38:08 radhermit kde-misc/kcm-gtk-config 2011-05-05 13:26:55 scarabeus media-sound/pianobar2011-05-06 08:19:33 radhermit media-sound/xnoise 2011-05-07 07:47:10 angelos xfce-extra/xfce4-indicator-plugin 2011-05-07 07:49:34 angelos app-emacs/twittering-mode 2011-05-07 09:05:23 naota dev-python/pyftpdlib2011-05-07 10:19:46 phajdan.jr app-editors/ee 2011-05-07 15:46:17 hattya dev-java/byaccj 2011-05-07 19:51:18 elvanor media-gfx/qrencode-python 2011-05-08 09:15:44 jlec dev-tex/abntex 2011-05-08 16:26:08 rafaelmartins -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 Removed Packages: app-editors/easyedit,removed,hattya,2011-05-07 15:57:55 Added Packages: gnustep-libs/dbuskit,added,voyageur,2011-05-02 13:41:54 dev-lua/lua-zlib,added,djc,2011-05-02 16:42:39 net-mail/mhonarc-gentoo,added,tampakrap,2011-05-02 22:21:32 media-gfx/cutycapt,added,mattm,2011-05-03 04:11:10 www-client/opera-next,added,jer,2011-05-03 19:42:43 dev-python/cosmolopy,added,bicatali,2011-05-03 22:12:43 sci-libs/spr,added,bicatali,2011-05-04 00:15:31 app-vim/gitv,added,radhermit,2011-05-04 08:23:23 app-vim/vimcalc,added,radhermit,2011-05-04 11:38:08 kde-misc/kcm-gtk-config,added,scarabeus,2011-05-05 13:26:55 media-sound/pianobar,added,radhermit,2011-05-06 08:19:33 media-sound/xnoise,added,angelos,2011-05-07 07:47:10 xfce-extra/xfce4-indicator-plugin,added,angelos,2011-05-07 07:49:34 app-emacs/twittering-mode,added,naota,2011-05-07 09:05:23 dev-python/pyftpdlib,added,phajdan.jr,2011-05-07 10:19:46 app-editors/ee,added,hattya,2011-05-07 15:46:17 dev-java/byaccj,added,elvanor,2011-05-07 19:51:18 media-gfx/qrencode-python,added,jlec,2011-05-08 09:15:44 dev-tex/abntex,added,rafaelmartins,2011-05-08 16:26:08 Done.
Re: [gentoo-dev] introspection use flag
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 2:18 AM, Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> On Saturday 07 of May 2011 01:18:57 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
>> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Maciej Mrozowski
> wrote:
>> > On Friday 06 of May 2011 15:18:20 Marijn wrote:
>> >> And what happened to the proposed description:
>> >>
>> >> introspection: Add gobject-introspection support, allowing for the
>> >> dynamic generation of bindings for various languages
>> >
>> > No.
>> >
>> > http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org/msg40069.html
>>
>> It's things like this that convinced us that there's no real advantage
>> in having it as a global use-flag. Maybe 3 years later when there is
>> *still* nothing else in the tree that uses "introspection" besides
>> gobject-introspection, we'll revisit this and finally make it a global
>> use-flag.
>
> Nirbheek... and what's particularly wrong with 'introspection' global USE flag
> having implementation-agnostic "Enable runtime API introspection" description?
>
The reasoning I had in mind was as follows:
* I prefer use-flag descriptions to give the required information to
the user as far as possible in one sentence (or two if necessary).
* metadata.xml must be used for this if the global use-flag
description is too generic.
Following these two, it would mean that the global USE-flag
description you are proposing would be too generic, and would require
local use-flag descriptions for all the current uses of
USE=introspection in the tree. This would not change the status quo.
This will of course change if/when some other tool comes up which does
a similar job, and is toggleable in a similar way. One of our
proposals (back then) was that we add the specific description now,
and switch over to the generic one when that situation comes to be.
However, that was rejected, and we ended up going with the local
use-flag descriptions.
At this point, adding a global use-flag with that generic description
would only mean that some packages (whose maintainers are a bit lazy)
will have inconsistent use-flag descriptions, which will cause
confusion to users.
So, I see no point adding a generic global use-flag description right
now. It can either be added when another such tool comes up, or the
current description can be made global when it looks like
gobject-introspection will be the only such tool.
PS: Apologies if I sounded harsh in my earlier mail. I felt like I was
reliving the old discussion, and it sort of heated me up.
> Nobody sees anything wrong with overly vague 'xml' global USE flag and my
> proposition isn't worse ('Add support for XML files' ... you mean what
> support? import/export or just expat vs libxml2?)
>
> --
> regards
> MM
>
--
~Nirbheek Chauhan
Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team
[gentoo-dev] Re: introspection use flag
Maciej Mrozowski posted on Sun, 08 May 2011 22:48:39 +0200 as excerpted:
> Nirbheek... and what's particularly wrong with 'introspection' global
> USE flag having implementation-agnostic "Enable runtime API
> introspection" description?
>
> Nobody sees anything wrong with overly vague 'xml' global USE flag and
> my proposition isn't worse ('Add support for XML files' ... you mean
> what support? import/export or just expat vs libxml2?)
FWIW, I believe it's more a case of "what's done is done, and it's more
hassle than anybody's been willing to take to fix it now" in the case of
USE=xml, than not seeing anything wrong with it. But just because there's
already such examples in wide use in the tree doesn't mean we need or want
more of them!
Certainly that's my feeling as a Gentoo sysadmin trying to make sense of
such flags and how they affect various packages, especially when a bug
ends up being USE-flag dependent and I need to know whether I actually
need that functionality or not.
--
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] introspection use flag
On Saturday 07 of May 2011 01:18:57 Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Maciej Mrozowski
wrote:
> > On Friday 06 of May 2011 15:18:20 Marijn wrote:
> >> And what happened to the proposed description:
> >>
> >> introspection: Add gobject-introspection support, allowing for the
> >> dynamic generation of bindings for various languages
> >
> > No.
> >
> > http://www.mail-archive.com/gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org/msg40069.html
>
> It's things like this that convinced us that there's no real advantage
> in having it as a global use-flag. Maybe 3 years later when there is
> *still* nothing else in the tree that uses "introspection" besides
> gobject-introspection, we'll revisit this and finally make it a global
> use-flag.
Nirbheek... and what's particularly wrong with 'introspection' global USE flag
having implementation-agnostic "Enable runtime API introspection" description?
Nobody sees anything wrong with overly vague 'xml' global USE flag and my
proposition isn't worse ('Add support for XML files' ... you mean what
support? import/export or just expat vs libxml2?)
--
regards
MM
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
