Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

[Daniel Campbell]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256

On 11/18/2015 04:06 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> On 18/11/15 13:01, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> People who run ~arch are not really end-users - they're 
>> contributors who have volunteered to test packages.
> We are talking about people who run Gentoo stable who need to 
> keyword several specific packages because the lack of manpower 
> leads to Gentoo stable by itself not being very usable for most 
> people.
> 
> 
> Whatever. I just wanted to raise my concern. It has been raised. 
> You're all free to not care. Too bad for the user^Wthankless 
> contributors.
> 

I can't speak for other maintainers, but I thank each bug reporter
that I work with; ~arch users *are* important because their (and our)
testing is what allows us to even *have* a stable set of packages.

That said, I wouldn't feel comfortable writing EAPI 6 ebuilds on
packages with any stable dependencies. At least for the time being; I
wouldn't want to disturb stable users. But once EAPI 6-compatible
portage is stabilized, I see no issue.
- -- 
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C  1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
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=JpWy
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: media-video/ffmpeg/

[Michał Górny]

On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 15:52:32 +0100
Alexis Ballier  wrote:

> On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 15:26:43 +0100
> Michał Górny  wrote:
> 
> > Dnia 20 listopada 2015 11:19:35 CET, Alexis Ballier
> >  napisał(a):  
> > >On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 23:21:52 +0100
> > >Michał Górny  wrote:
> > >
> > >> And here you removed the newest version having ~ia64 keyword,
> > >breaking
> > >> revdeps:
> > >> 
> > >> https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/1061286/7.html#l885
> > >> 
> > >> I suggest you use eshowkw before removing packages. Please fix or
> > >> revert this.
> > >
> > >done; thx for the reminder
> > >
> > >
> > >feel free to revert such commits (at least mine) and send me an email
> > >so that i get notified something went wrong in the future
> > >
> > >PS: can't these checks/emails be automated ? it must be very boring
> > >to manually track the culprit from ci output
> > 
> > Not one that I can think of. This usually requires looking at what
> > changed in both packages, and sometimes profiles. I don't want to
> > blame wrong people just because someone made an irrelevant commit in
> > a package.  
> 
> if CI runs after each commit, it should just be a matter of emailing
> the author when some new breakage appears

If CI were to run after each commit, I'd need a cluster of servers to
run it ;-). On the pretty powerful server donated to the task it takes
7 minutes for a single run, with 16 parallel jobs.

Of course, someone could try to optimize it more, or write a faster
checker. I'd really appreciate if someone had the time to do that ;-).

At some point, I wanted to make it try 'git bisect'-ing when new
failure occurs. However, I don't have the time nor the resources to
work on it. In fact, I don't even have time to make it a little bit
smarter and figure out which packages are failing. Right now, it only
reports changes in number of failures -- if you fix one and break one,
it won't report that.

So, yes, there's a lot of work and nobody to do it.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny



pgppZyUaFQz_5.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: media-video/ffmpeg/

[Alexis Ballier]

On Fri, 20 Nov 2015 15:26:43 +0100
Michał Górny  wrote:

> Dnia 20 listopada 2015 11:19:35 CET, Alexis Ballier
>  napisał(a):
> >On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 23:21:52 +0100
> >Michał Górny  wrote:
> >  
> >> And here you removed the newest version having ~ia64 keyword,  
> >breaking  
> >> revdeps:
> >> 
> >> https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/1061286/7.html#l885
> >> 
> >> I suggest you use eshowkw before removing packages. Please fix or
> >> revert this.  
> >
> >done; thx for the reminder
> >
> >
> >feel free to revert such commits (at least mine) and send me an email
> >so that i get notified something went wrong in the future
> >
> >PS: can't these checks/emails be automated ? it must be very boring
> >to manually track the culprit from ci output  
> 
> Not one that I can think of. This usually requires looking at what
> changed in both packages, and sometimes profiles. I don't want to
> blame wrong people just because someone made an irrelevant commit in
> a package.

if CI runs after each commit, it should just be a matter of emailing
the author when some new breakage appears

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: media-video/ffmpeg/

[Michał Górny]

Dnia 20 listopada 2015 11:19:35 CET, Alexis Ballier  
napisał(a):
>On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 23:21:52 +0100
>Michał Górny  wrote:
>
>> And here you removed the newest version having ~ia64 keyword,
>breaking
>> revdeps:
>> 
>> https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/1061286/7.html#l885
>> 
>> I suggest you use eshowkw before removing packages. Please fix or
>> revert this.
>
>done; thx for the reminder
>
>
>feel free to revert such commits (at least mine) and send me an email
>so that i get notified something went wrong in the future
>
>PS: can't these checks/emails be automated ? it must be very boring to
>manually track the culprit from ci output

Not one that I can think of. This usually requires looking at what changed in 
both packages, and sometimes profiles. I don't want to blame wrong people just 
because someone made an irrelevant commit in a package.


-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

[Rich Freeman]

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 4:39 AM, Patrick Lauer  wrote:
>
> On 11/18/2015 01:01 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 6:12 AM, Alexander Berntsen  
>> wrote:
>>> When I do QA in projects I'm involved with (at least outside of
>>> Gentoo), we don't do it live on end-user systems. I'll leave the
>>> details as an exercise for the Gentoo developer.
>>>
>> People who run ~arch are not really end-users - they're contributors
>> who have volunteered to test packages.
> Or people that use Gentoo because it allows them to satisfy requirements.
>

So, again portage is a bit unusual in that it doesn't have an upstream
outside of Gentoo.

I think that a QA layer for Portage is a great idea, but it simply
isn't going to happen unless somebody actually steps up to create one.
The fact that more portage QA would be useful doesn't mean that the
few volunteers working on portage should be banned from introducing
new versions into ~arch until they create and staff a new QA effort.
They're of course welcome to work on that if that is what they want to
do, but I don't think anybody is going to try to dictate to them what
they work on.

If somebody really would benefit from more portage QA, I'd suggest
either pitching in to do the work, or finding some way to entice
others to do so.

-- 
Rich

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: net-libs/courier-unicode/

[Eray Aslan]

On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 11:07:50PM +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> This version is required by courier-imap-4.16.0 [1], so you've caused
> a depgraph breakage. Please either revert this,

Done.  Thanks for the email.

-- 
Eray

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] repo/gentoo:master commit in: media-video/ffmpeg/

[Alexis Ballier]

On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 23:21:52 +0100
Michał Górny  wrote:

> And here you removed the newest version having ~ia64 keyword, breaking
> revdeps:
> 
> https://qa-reports.gentoo.org/output/gentoo-ci/1061286/7.html#l885
> 
> I suggest you use eshowkw before removing packages. Please fix or
> revert this.

done; thx for the reminder


feel free to revert such commits (at least mine) and send me an email
so that i get notified something went wrong in the future

PS: can't these checks/emails be automated ? it must be very boring to
manually track the culprit from ci output

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

[Patrick Lauer]

On 11/18/2015 01:01 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 6:12 AM, Alexander Berntsen  
> wrote:
>> When I do QA in projects I'm involved with (at least outside of
>> Gentoo), we don't do it live on end-user systems. I'll leave the
>> details as an exercise for the Gentoo developer.
>>
> People who run ~arch are not really end-users - they're contributors
> who have volunteered to test packages.
Or people that use Gentoo because it allows them to satisfy requirements.

At work I don't 'want' to use ~arch packages, but external constraints
very strongly suggest that. Otherwise we'd just be on CentOS 5 and not
worry about things working properly.

And still we try to run updates in a sandbox first so we catch breakage
before it becomes a problem.

Re: [gentoo-dev] EAPI 6 portage is out!

[Ian Delaney]

On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 11:47:01 -0500
Rich Freeman  wrote:

> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:10 AM, Brian Dolbec 
> wrote:
> > On Wed, 18 Nov 2015 06:59:19 -0500
> > Rich Freeman  wrote:
  
> 
> It is a bit ironic that you chose this as the part to quote when
> adding a snide remark.  My whole point was that we shouldn't
> NEEDLESSLY drop old versions,  You seemed to have taken this as a
> complaint about dropping old versions when there is a valid reason for
> doing so.
> 
> Your tone here is anything but helpful.  My intent was really to
> contribute to the discussion constructively and point out a pain point
> for people running mixed-keywords.  Perhaps I didn't explain my point
> as well as I could have.  When somebody is saying something that
> doesn't seem sensible to you, it is usually better to assume that they
> just didn't make their point well than to assume that they don't have
> anything worth saying.
> 

Bravo.
Lemme think of an example of similar replies I have had to endure in
this style.
'Your logic / code makes no sense' (Well logical thinking is a tad beyond me 
yeah)

One will do. Other authors might recognise their closed minded retorts
and other such blunders.
What ever was so hard about politely prompting to please re-phrase, or,
more casually, run that by me again, or "I need you to re-state that",
or even plain 'huh'. Alternatively; wtf are you saying? (Love that one)

Let's consider the lack of virtues of leaping to the wrong
interpretation aka misunderstanding the data put, then jumping in head
first & retorting to the 'sender' with what amounts to a blatant
smack down. But, as the guides to use of irc tells us in the first
place; pure text, absent of the remainder of visual and auditory
metadata, offers a highly restricted context, highly prone to error.
aka, text on a screen. In other words, a disaster looking for a
location.

Oh and dol-sen don't feel you're being picked on. You of all
folk are NOT one to typically fall over this one. Wish it were
someone far more 'typical'. 

But I stray, NOT troll.
What were we talking about again?


-- 
kind regards

Ian Delaney