Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Services and software which is critical for Gentoo should be developed/run in Gentoo namespace

2020-09-16 Thread Kent Fredric
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 16:05:49 -0600 Tim Harder wrote: > Speaking for myself, I avoid hosting most of my Gentoo-related work > (outside of gentoo repo ebuild mangling) on gentoo.org since I prefer > the services offered elsewhere in terms of usability, visibility, and > project maintenance. Take

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last rites: sci-chemistry/ortep3

2020-09-16 Thread Ashley Dixon
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:21:17PM +0200, David Seifert wrote: > # David Seifert (2020-09-16) > # EAPI 4, last release in 2001, the Fortran source code > # is terrible and has buffer overflows. > # Removal in 30 days. Bug #664120, #742008. > sci-chemistry/ortep3 I can't see how this ebuild was

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Services and software which is critical for Gentoo should be developed/run in Gentoo namespace

2020-09-16 Thread Kent Fredric
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 19:47:35 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote: > Seems like a way to improve this would be better documentation and a > DIY infra testing platform. > > First, document how to prepare a service for infra hosting. Maybe > provide an example service. > > Second, publish a tarball of a

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Services and software which is critical for Gentoo should be developed/run in Gentoo namespace

2020-09-16 Thread Kent Fredric
On Wed, 16 Sep 2020 07:11:12 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote: > I realize this is a bit more tangential. I just think that infra is > already a huge failure point, so having more stuff on infra actually > makes that failure point more critical. A Gentoo where little is > hosted on stuff we own is

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Services and software which is critical for Gentoo should be developed/run in Gentoo namespace

2020-09-16 Thread Rich Freeman
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 11:44 AM Alec Warner wrote: > > - repomirror-ci and all the CI stuff is on infra because mgorny is also on > infra! It's not like we set his stuff up for him; instead we gave him access > to all the infra repos and he had to write his own puppet configs and > whatnot.

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Services and software which is critical for Gentoo should be developed/run in Gentoo namespace

2020-09-16 Thread Tim Harder
On 2020-09-16 Wed 09:36, Jonas Stein wrote: > The heart of a distribution is basically its infrastructure and the > tools to test, maintain and distribute packages. > > If a distribution relies on external sources, which are not maintained > by the distribution, but a single person, it has been

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: app-admin/recursos

2020-09-16 Thread Sam James
# Sam James (2020-09-16) # Stuck on EAPI 4, only source is mirror://gentoo, # unmaintained, HOMEPAGE gone. app-admin/recursos signature.asc Description: Message signed with OpenPGP

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: sci-chemistry/ortep3

2020-09-16 Thread David Seifert
# David Seifert (2020-09-16) # EAPI 4, last release in 2001, the Fortran source code # is terrible and has buffer overflows. # Removal in 30 days. Bug #664120, #742008. sci-chemistry/ortep3

Re: [gentoo-dev] How to stabilize packages with frequent release cycles?

2020-09-16 Thread Jonas Stein
Hi, > When the latest release remains 'latest ~arch' for less than 3 days, > stabilizing it after 30 days makes little sense. After all, people with > frequent upgrade cycle will test it for no more than that, and people > with infrequent upgrade cycle may miss the version entirely. > Do you

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Services and software which is critical for Gentoo should be developed/run in Gentoo namespace

2020-09-16 Thread Alec Warner
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 1:17 AM Kent Fredric wrote: > On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 10:15:31 -0400 > Rich Freeman wrote: > > > It might be easier to take smaller steps, such as having a policy that > > "any call for devs to use/test a new tool/service, or any service that > > automatically performs

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Services and software which is critical for Gentoo should be developed/run in Gentoo namespace

2020-09-16 Thread Jonas Stein
Hi, > However, we are still facing the same problem: Only one person is > involved in development and knows how to run it. In case something will > break again and Michał will be unavailable, we can’t just push a fix and > watch a CI pipeline picking up and deploying new nattka. Instead someone >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] glep-0068: Add new element

2020-09-16 Thread Jaco Kroon
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Hi, On 2020/09/16 11:39, Michał Górny wrote: > On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 11:13 +0200, Jaco Kroon wrote: >> >>> +- at most one element containing version >>> +  constraints used to determine stabilization candidates, as detailed >>> +  in

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Services and software which is critical for Gentoo should be developed/run in Gentoo namespace

2020-09-16 Thread Rich Freeman
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 4:17 AM Kent Fredric wrote: > > On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 10:15:31 -0400 > Rich Freeman wrote: > > > It might be easier to take smaller steps, such as having a policy that > > "any call for devs to use/test a new tool/service, or any service that > > automatically performs

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] glep-0068: Add new element

2020-09-16 Thread Michał Górny
On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 11:13 +0200, Jaco Kroon wrote: > Hi Michał, > > Thanks for your efforts. This looks interesting at the very least, and > whilst in many cases on posts on this ML I'm on the "don't care" stance, > this one looks like it could solve some problems for me. > net-misc/asterisk

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] glep-0068: Add new element

2020-09-16 Thread Jaco Kroon
Hi Michał, Thanks for your efforts.  This looks interesting at the very least, and whilst in many cases on posts on this ML I'm on the "don't care" stance, this one looks like it could solve some problems for me.  net-misc/asterisk + friends will definitely make use of this. Two nitpicks below

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: packages only relevant to the already removed metasploit

2020-09-16 Thread Hans de Graaff
# Hans de Graaff (2020-09-16) # Dependencies of the already removed metasploit that are relevant # only with metasploit. Masked for removal in 30 days. dev-ruby/meterpreter_bins dev-ruby/patch_finder dev-ruby/rb-readline-r7 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] glep-0068: Add new element

2020-09-16 Thread Michał Górny
On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 10:26 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020, Michał Górny wrote: > > It has two advantages: > > 1. It reduces the risk of accidentally leaving it in the stable ebuild. > > Huh, you mean you would remove the PROPERTIES token again, after the > version

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] glep-0068: Add new element

2020-09-16 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020, Michał Górny wrote: > It has two advantages: > 1. It reduces the risk of accidentally leaving it in the stable ebuild. Huh, you mean you would remove the PROPERTIES token again, after the version has been stabilised? Why? Ebuilds could do conditionals like this

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Services and software which is critical for Gentoo should be developed/run in Gentoo namespace

2020-09-16 Thread Kent Fredric
On Mon, 14 Sep 2020 10:15:31 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote: > It might be easier to take smaller steps, such as having a policy that > "any call for devs to use/test a new tool/service, or any service that > automatically performs transactions on bugzilla, must be FOSS, and the > link to the source

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] glep-0068: Add new element

2020-09-16 Thread Michał Górny
On Wed, 2020-09-16 at 08:18 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, 16 Sep 2020, Michał Górny wrote: > > > +- one or more elements, each containing a version > > + constraint in the format matching EAPI 0 dependency specification > > + with the package category and name parts

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] glep-0068: Add new element

2020-09-16 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Wed, 16 Sep 2020, Michał Górny wrote: > +- one or more elements, each containing a version > + constraint in the format matching EAPI 0 dependency specification > + with the package category and name parts omitted, e.g. ``<1.7``. That's not a very powerful syntax, so unless I