Re: [gentoo-dev] Mailing list moderation and community openness

On 22/03/18 07:31, Benda Xu wrote: > We might be able to require GPG signed email to make a post. Almost definitely. But before bikeshedding that, it would be advisable to find out whether it would be a good idea in the first place. Unless you want only prospective developers to be able to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Mailing list moderation and community openness

On 20/03/18 13:17, Michael Palimaka wrote: > Could someone please explain how this doesn't directly contradict the > core tenets of an open and inclusive community? It's fairly simple to produce a justification of the decision. I can think of several ways of doing so. One is through an appeal to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On 10/01/18 08:55, Lars Wendler wrote: > Seems we're turning into an elitist club or something... Gentoo has already had the reputation of being an elitist club for years. As such I'd like to see steps to remedy this status, rather than taking steps like this, which just exacerbates the

Re: Re : Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Constraint-Based Dependency Solver for Portage: a prototype

On 08/01/18 03:06, Michael Lienhardt wrote: > Many thanks for the advices. I started few discussions on the forum > and will go to FOSDEM. I'll see where it will go. Consider mentioning this in #gentoo-fosdem on irc.freenode.net, which is where the Gentoo devs & users who are going to FOSDEM

Re: [gentoo-dev] [QA] New policy: 'files' directory must not be larger than 32 KiB

On 17/12/17 20:35, Lars Wendler wrote: >> On Sun, Dec 17, 2017 at 1:39 PM, Mike Gilbert >> wrote: >>> I just want to voice my opinion on this: as a developer, this >>> policy is a royal pain in the ass. >>> >>> I would ask the council to please increase this limit to at >>>

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] Disable dynamic-deps by default

ACK. Finally. -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: repo/gentoo:master commit in: dev-libs/libunibreak/

On 14/12/17 17:09, David Seifert wrote: >> So I can add tons of broken packages, sprinkled over different >> days, hidden between other valid bumps, and can then tell people >> they need to lastrite this stuff first and do the 30-day rain >> dance? Come on, even for Gentoo standards, that's

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Constraint-Based Dependency Solver for Portage: a prototype

Unfortunately I am way too busy to even entertain looking into this in any detail. A few years ago I was hoping to work on something like this, though in Agda (or possibly in Haskell or Coq), and do work on making Portage much more modular so that you could actually pick whatever dependency

Re: That's all folks. (Re: OT Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-project] [RFC] Splitting developer-oriented and expert user mailing lists)

On 08/12/17 21:22, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > > Independent of whether William now unsubscribed or not, he's now enjoying a > lengthy (1 year until review) vacation from all Gentoo communication channels. > This seems like a meaningless thing to post at this point. And you might want to

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last-rites: app-arch/unrar-gpl

On 31/08/17 09:49, Vladimir Romanov wrote: > I've attached "old" rar_v3.rar and "new" rar_v4.rar. Works fine. :) -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last-rites: app-arch/unrar-gpl

On 31/08/17 09:37, Vladimir Romanov wrote: > But does it work for RAR5? Give me a RAR5, and I can test it for you. -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Last-rites: app-arch/unrar-gpl

Just a note in case anyone is relying on this package for RAR files; check out unar. It's LGPL, and works for e.g. RARv3. -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Changing PMS to Portage Manager Specification

While the PMS perhaps hasn't been an unequivocal success, it's still a good effort with some success. I would be disappointed to see the proposed change, and view it as a bad sign for Gentoo. -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander signature.asc Description:

[gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev] taking a break from arches stabilization

On 10/07/17 20:11, Jonas Stein wrote: > It would be so motivating to see that many user are glad about a > special package. One gets rarely feedback. Interesting idea. We could have some (separate) portage-y helper tool send a standardised email that could easily be filtered based on sender

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Leader election

On 06/07/17 19:25, Brian Dolbec wrote: > You can't, I declined this time around You didn't reply here. So technically you just didn't accept. ;) I vote for Zac then. -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Leader election

I vote for Brian. -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Leader election

On 04/07/17 22:02, Zac Medico wrote: > Thank you, I accept. > > I also nominate Brian Dolbec and Alexander Berntsen. Thank you, I accept. Do we vote here in the same thread? -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPG

[gentoo-portage-dev] Leader election & general development meeting

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Friends, It's that time of year. We're having a leader election again, as well as a general development meeting. The agenda will be updated in more detail at: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Portage/Meetings Please schedule a time at:

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Restricted version of gentoo-dev mailing list

On 27/05/17 18:17, Patrick Lauer wrote: > But you do gentoo wrong, so as a user I'd like you to reconsider what > you wrote there and maybe take a long vacation. I too do not hate our users (in which I include myself). Treating users as a worthless nuisance, unless they're writing ebuilds or

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2] preserve-libs: handle manually removed libraries better (bug 599240)

It's OK by me then. -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] preserve-libs: handle manually removed libraries better (bug 599240)

On 09/11/16 10:05, Zac Medico wrote: > Before a package is merge +d Looks okay. What's the performance impact, if non-negligible? -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] emerge-webrsync: use gkeys to verify gpg signatures (bug 597918)

On 27/10/16 19:16, Zac Medico wrote: > Use gkeys to verify gpg signatures by default. Refresh the gentoo > snapshot signing key before signature verification, in order to > ensure that the latest revocation data is available. Add an > --insecure option which disables gpg signature verification.

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Leadership election

On 11/10/16 18:28, Brian Dolbec wrote: > hmm, seems I've been drafted :) OK, so Brian's the new lead. Gz. -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] repoman: add gentoo to remote-id type.

Is there an associated bug for this? The patch itself looks reasonable enough, but I prefer knowing the background for patches being deemed necessary. Also, get rid of the period in the commit message. And we seem to... mostly... agree that it should be 'component: Capitalised description', not

[gentoo-portage-dev] Leadership election

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Friends, It's that time of year. I have been lead developer for a year, so we need to have another election. I've not been very good, nor attentive enough. So if you want to elect someone else than me, I can understand that. If nobody else wants

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2] setup.py: enable libc bindings optionally (bug 594744)

LGTM. -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] setup.py: enable libc bindings optionally (bug 594744)

On 02/10/16 05:03, Zac Medico wrote: > The ebuild can use this Shouldn't "this" be documented somewhere more useful than in the commit msg? Also, the msg should mention that the libc bindings are optional in the first place. -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] ebuild.sh: start phases in temporary HOME if available (bug 595028)

No real opinion -- not familiar enough with this to suggest alternative solutions. Patch itself looks OK. -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] EventLoop: add run_until_complete method (bug 591760)

On 21/08/16 00:18, Zac Medico wrote: > This emulates the > asyncio.AbstractEventLoop.run_until_complete(future) interface What's that, and why are we emulating it instead of just using it? > which will make it possible to reduce latency in situations where it > is desirable for a loop to exit at

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] Scheduler._terminate_tasks: purge _running_tasks (bug 425554)

Woah. I remember this bug. Nice. LGTM. -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] emerge: add --fuzzy-search and --search-similarity (bug 65566)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 LGTM. Thanks for addressing my previous concerns. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJXqE9jAAoJENQqWdRUGk8B4m8QAJyQ7AicdYPGvF8pnIsGafKf

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 04/07/16 20:00, Zac Medico wrote: > I wasn't aware that there was an argument about that. I didn't argue it very heavily, but I do find it useful. > I'll be happy to send pushed emails. Thanks! - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Never mind. I see that it's already pushed. I guess this is where I continue to argue my case for "Pushed as [commit hash]" emails. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] Add emerge --autounmask-continue option (bug 582624)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 01/07/16 18:42, Duncan wrote: > Perhaps rename the option so it makes perfectly clear the possible > consequences? Something like --autounmask-breakme, or > --auto-breakme ? No. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] bugs.g.o: Killing VERIFIED state, possibly introducing STABILIZED

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 17/06/16 15:58, Rich Freeman wrote: > That could actually be generalized. I could see many types of > bugs where the issue is with upstream, and we might want to track > the progress as upstream implements a fix, releases it, and then it > is

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] bugs.g.o: Killing VERIFIED state, possibly introducing STABILIZED

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 I *seriously* object to a RFC that affects so many people lasting *less than 24h*. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] bugs.g.o: Killing VERIFIED state, possibly introducing STABILIZED

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 17/06/16 09:50, Michał Górny wrote: > However, isn't the URL field sufficient for this? This is useful in many cases for describing the bug and similar things when the bug is being reported. Is it possible to have multiple URLs sensibly in this

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] bugs.g.o: Merging UNCONFIRMED & CONFIRMED into NEW

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 I would like to keep CONFIRMED as I use it and find it useful. I also think that renaming UNCONFIRMED to OPEN is silly and misleading, since any non-RESOLVED bug is indeed an open bug. I don't have anything against renaming it to NEW, although I

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] bugs.g.o: Killing VERIFIED state, possibly introducing STABILIZED

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 What we have been doing in Portage so far is that when we fix it in git, we put IN_PROGRESS + InVCS, and write a comment that links to the commit on gitweb. Then when we actually release Portage, we consider it to be fixed, and make it RESOLVED. I

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 16/06/16 09:39, Daniel Campbell wrote: > I guess what I mean is these outside developers could continue > hacking and/or breaking things, or whatever else, without worrying > about their "official" branch. We could have a standard that >

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 16/06/16 09:34, Daniel Campbell wrote: > There is overhead in choosing which repositories you want to > include in your 'upstream'. Even with an automated tool like > layman, there's maintenance overhead. We'd need another tool to > assist in

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 16/06/16 09:24, Daniel Campbell wrote: > To touch on the user repo part.. can't it be as simple as adding > one requirement to user repos that wish to be considered as > curated? > > Create a "gentoo-ci" branch or something else, and the

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 You've got most things right, Rich. But a couple of comments follow. On 15/06/16 02:25, Rich Freeman wrote: > 1. Developers wouldn't have access to all the ebuilds in the > curated repositories. They would only have access to the ones they >

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 14/06/16 08:48, Daniel Campbell wrote: > What sort of modularization are you talking about? The cheap answer is "as much as possible. > Would we suggest something like GNOME, KDE, XFCE, Mate, Cinnamon, > et al getting their own overlays?

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Enforced OpenPGP signatures

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 14/06/16 20:48, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Please file a bug to have infra turn it on for the repos you want > (specify them in the bug). Thank you, Robin. Will do once I have some sort of ACK, or at least a long enough period without NACKs. -

[gentoo-portage-dev] Enforced OpenPGP signatures

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Friends, I saw Brian asking Michał to OpenPGP-sign his commits in IRC, to which Michał quipped that we would have if it were enforced. So perhaps we should just enforce it. Most of us do it -- but I see Zac not doing it sometimes, seemingly at

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 In addition to what Peter Stuge (correctly) identifies as needing to change, there also needs to be a modularisation of Gentoo-curated package repositories. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] repoman: flag URIs using http:// when https:// is available

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Looks OK to me, but I'll let Brian have primary ACK on repoman for some time forward. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 13/06/16 10:09, M. J. Everitt wrote: > Excuse me .. and this thread emerged from deprecating the EXACT > thing you are suggesting!? I don't know what you are talking about. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 13/06/16 09:54, M. J. Everitt wrote: > I really think someone needs to do a bit of portageq and see what > the Tree *actually* contains > > Likewise .. a trek through bugzilla would also be enlightening for > those not familiar ... > >

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 11/06/16 09:00, Michał Górny wrote: > If you are not going to maintain your contribution, we can't > guarantee it will be accepted. I'm certainly not interested in > having to worry about 20 more maintainer-needed packages next month > because

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 10/06/16 18:18, Rich Freeman wrote: > And my understanding again for Exherbo And it is wrong again, according to an Exherbo user I talked to. Please get your Exherbo developer to participate directly, because I think you are having some trouble

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 10/06/16 17:32, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > On 10/06/16 03:53 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: >> ... Their repositories would likely be amalgamations of our >> curated and reviewed repositories ... > Could you elaborat

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 10/06/16 12:38, Rich Freeman wrote: > So, I was chatting with an Exherbo dev. Their model isn't quite > what your earlier emails seemed to suggest (at least as I read > it). You should get them to reply to this thread, because... > As I

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 10/06/16 11:33, Consus wrote: > That's great, but how are you gonna prevent nodejs-like > clusterfuck[?] By not being nodejs. The core repos are curated and reviewed. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 11/06/16 22:37, Pacho Ramos wrote: > sys-apps/razercfg I'm not an ebuild person, but if someone could maintain this I would be grateful. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 10/06/16 09:39, M. J. Everitt wrote: > So forgive me for being blind .. but we were talking about going > -away- from central, curated repositories, and now we've come full > circle to the situation we have now with overlays, mostly >

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/06/16 22:15, Michał Górny wrote: > Didn't you just contradict yourself? First you tell that everyone > should have their own public repo... then you tell that we should > merge stuff from those repos. So are you targeting split-repo > model,

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/06/16 12:28, Igor Savlook wrote: > Ok how coordinate? Example: I install packageA in exherbo from > repository1 and packageA denend on packageB on repository2. Now > packageB removed from repository2 and exherbo crash on install > package

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/06/16 12:20, Rich Freeman wrote: > Perhaps you could explain how they actually prevent the issues I > brought up? You should probably ask the Exherbo developers, not me. > > Suppose you have 10 packages, and they each depend on zlib from a

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/06/16 12:14, Johannes Huber wrote: > This statement is not feeded with numbers. Distrowatch tells > something else. I don't know what "feeded" means. Distrowatch is useless for anything but figuring out what distros are popular among people

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/06/16 11:55, Daniel Campbell wrote: > According to Enigmail, it expired April 19th. I suggest you refresh your keys. My signing subkey was signed April 20th and expires in 2017. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/06/16 11:45, M. J. Everitt wrote: > Btw, your key is showing up as expired, Alex. It doesn't expire until next year. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 09/06/16 01:08, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > Sigh. Every 2 years somebody else comes up with the same silly > idea. I stopped reading your email after this sentence. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 08/06/16 18:15, Peter Stuge wrote: > Do NOT - I repeat NOT - tie "user repos" to GitHub Inc. If I were in charge or to be involved, I would not even dream about tying users to a proprietary SaaS. That would be highly unethical in my view. - --

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 08/06/16 17:53, james wrote: >> DEAL? No thanks. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJXWTpTAAoJENQqWdRUGk8BPAsQAM1vjeh7AzBx8yVGHcZ0U+vJ

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 08/06/16 16:53, Rich Freeman wrote: > Do you propose that you can have cross-repo dependencies? Sure. This works well in Exherbo using Paludis. We could do it right now if we wanted to. > If so that creates a lot of potential issues, even if you

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 08/06/16 16:53, Consus wrote: > How all those people are expected to coordinate their work? I don't want to control this. That's up to them. It works well in Exherbo and NixOS. But I agree that tooling to support it would be useful. - --

Re: Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 08/06/16 16:39, Zac Medico wrote: > The first obstacle that comes to my mind is how to discover the > packages. There needs to be a central index of repositories which > includes searchable metadata for all of the packages provided by > those

Facilitating user contributed ebuilds (Was: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Friends, It would be wise of us to create a novel way of involving users from the ashes of Sunrise. Here is my suggestion: It would be fruitful to encourage every single Gentoo user to have their own repository. And this repository should be

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] New meeting

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Friends, Thank you for a nice meeting. A summary has been made available along with the full log[0]. Brian, could you upload the log to your devspace and link that instead of the bpaste? It would be nice to have them all in the same place. If you

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Global USE=gui

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 07/06/16 13:27, James Le Cuirot wrote: > What does that mean? It means that it is made explicit in some way clearly visible to the end-user. > Take www-client/otter, for example. It's a qt5-based browser. It > doesn't have the qt5 flag. How can

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Global USE=gui

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 07/06/16 11:27, James Le Cuirot wrote: > I don't think that's unreasonable given that it only does that > when qt4 and gtk3 are disabled. It is horribly counter-intuitive. -qt5 should never result in qt5. > Some packages require qt5

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] New meeting

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 07/06/16 09:48, Michał Górny wrote: >> Could you add the topic of PMS compliance patches for me? Done. >> In case the latter happens, [here's a] short note I will paste this when we begin the discussion. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] New meeting

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 It seems the three of us who've replied are all available 2016-06-07 at 2pm UTC. That's 4pm for me. Check when it is in your timezone[0], and I'll see you then! And remember to update the agenda[1] with your items. [0]

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 3/3] pym/portage/util/locale.py: add a C module to help check locale

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 27/05/16 16:26, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > However, this gets bogged down in implementation details and fails > with musl. Is it possible to elucidate this a bit more in a paragraph? Right now it reads a bit like "but this fails because reasons

[gentoo-portage-dev] New meeting

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Brian approached me a while back saying we need a new meeting. So let's do that. Sorry for taking so long. So set your availability[0], and add your items to the agenda[1]. [0] [1]

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] Colorize packages in world_sets (bug 583164)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 26/05/16 17:29, Zac Medico wrote: > Looks good to me. ACK. Thank you. Pushed as 40cdc1c3f467ac94d3a966777eb6a0907c269550. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2 2/2] Colorize packages in world_sets (bug 583164)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Looks OK to me, but I'll set Zac ACK it too, since he was the one commenting on the bug. For future reference, please use --in-reply-to when sending v2 patches, so that they're in the same email thread. It is also customary to write what has

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 2/2] Colorize packages in world_sets (bug 583164)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 You give no justification for the first commit. This commit message has some grammar issues, so I don't know what you are trying to say in it. The bug has same relevant discussion. If you could give some reason for reverting in patch 1, and clean

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] Remove unneeded native_kwargs wrapper

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Welp that took forever to read through... I didn't see anything wrong with it. So if tests pass and everything looks OK to you, go ahead and push it. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH v2] repoman: declare '-x', '--xmlparse' command line options obsolete

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 24/05/16 02:31, Duncan wrote: > No argument with obsolete here, but as long as the option is still > allowed (even if ignored) for backward compatibility, isn't > "deprecated" the usual term? I meant to ask if there is any existing precedent in

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2] repoman: declare '-x', '--xmlparse' command line options obsolete

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 When submitting v2-patches, please submit them in-reply-to=the message ID of the original thread. The patch looks OK, but I don't recall us using the "OBSOLETE" phrase in any documentation. Does anybody know any phrase we should be using instead,

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2] news.py: Check only for major version when parsing

. Suggested-by: Ulrich Müller <u...@gentoo.org> Signed-off-by: Alexander Berntsen <berna...@gentoo.org> --- pym/portage/news.py | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/pym/portage/news.py b/pym/portage/news.py index 784ba70..ea1b947 100644 --- a/pym/por

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] news.py: Check only for major version when parsing

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 18/05/16 17:46, Zac Medico wrote: > not fnmatch.fnmatch(format_match.group(1), '1.*')): Wait, why "not"? - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] news.py: Check only for major version when parsing

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 18/05/16 17:46, Zac Medico wrote: > if (format_match is not None and not > fnmatch.fnmatch(format_match.group(1), '1.*')): Yes! Sorry! I had made that change, but then forgotten to stage it. So sorry. It's been hell of a day, so it just slipped

[gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] news.py: Check only for major version when parsing

. Suggested-by: Ulrich Müller <u...@gentoo.org> Signed-off-by: Alexander Berntsen <berna...@gentoo.org> --- pym/portage/news.py | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/pym/portage/news.py b/pym/portage/news.py index 784ba70..f52d96e 100644 --- a/pym/por

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] pym/portage/util/locale.py: add a C module to check locale

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 17/05/16 14:47, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > Since this is the first python module written in C included in > portage, as a side effect, we introduce the machinary for future > modules in setup.py. Split it into two commits. - -- Alexander

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] dblink: add locks for parallel-install with blockers (bug 576888)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 17/05/16 15:48, Brian Dolbec wrote: > Alexander, with 2.3.0_rc1-r1 released, I think we can re-open > portage code for more patches before the official 2.3.0 release. > We now know the split install is working, it only had the one > portage bug

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] dblink: add locks for parallel-install with blockers (bug 576888)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 16/05/16 21:20, Zac Medico wrote: > Can we merge this now? Yes! - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v5] Colorize packages in user sets (bug 577720)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 OK then. Pushed as 739845a6eab95fbc44eab1b7b938c860563631d7. Thank you, Adam! - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] __eapi6_src_prepare: handle empty PATCHES array (bug 579626)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 OK. LGTM. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJXGd+fAAoJENQqWdRUGk8BRR8QAMAwVCpFeoXIfDQ3KIhecKrV

[gentoo-portage-dev] Re: [PATCH] bin/portageq: perform case-insensitive matching for maintainer email addresses

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Pushed as 94e9bbb342ec6f2eec746f7500e9b0ae86722df7, with a slightly wibbled commit message (primarily to make it shorter). Please use the ML in the future, not the alias. Thanks for the patch! - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v5] Colorize packages in user sets (bug 577720)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Definitely a huge improvement over v1. Thanks a lot for taking the time and making the effort. You've been a great contributor! I'll leave the final word to Zac, but the patch looks OK to me now. If it's OK by Zac, I'll merge it quick as. - --

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] Colorize packages in user sets (bug 577720)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 20/03/16 15:33, Adam Mills wrote: > + def isUserSet(self): + return False + Furthermore, this makes no sense and needs to go. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] change how the tmp file for the commit msg is made

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 There's only superficial changes required to the commit message required -- capitalise the message, s/This changes/change/ in the description -- it looks good otherwise. However, I don't know whether this patch is *desired*. Doug, do you have a

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] emerge: add --search-fuzzy and --search-fuzzy-cutoff options (bug 65566)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 08/04/16 08:21, Zac Medico wrote: > Reverse? You want it to measure dissimilarity? Not sure what you > mean. Sorry, I meant reverse the *docs* to mean "find things that are at least 50% similar" rather than "cut off things that aren't above the

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH] emerge: add --search-fuzzy and --search-fuzzy-cutoff options (bug 65566)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 This is a great idea! On 04/04/16 07:03, Zac Medico wrote: > +.BR "\-\-search\-fuzzy [ y | n ]" > +Enable or disable fuzzy search for search actions. This is likely a good place to briefly explain what a "fuzzy search" is. Also, I'm not sold on

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v2] Colorize packages in user sets (bug 577720)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 I'm not too sure about the isUserSets, but unless anyone else has any feedback, I'll test and merge this during the week. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH v3] EbuildBuild: call _record_binpkg_info earlier (bug 578204)

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Thanks. LGTM. - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJW+3OvAAoJENQqWdRUGk8BM+wQAK1YIiKaS4itrZnJHAapQiCU

  1   2   3   4   5   >