On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 2:03 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> I'm just wondering if we're jumping the gun a little bit on
> IUSE="gui".. yes it'll be nice to have one flag that "just works"
> for anyone not caring about the details, but it'll also mean
> propagating a slew of REQUIRED_USE=" {X,wayla
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote:
> Rich Freeman posted on Fri, 11 Sep 2015 08:13:48 -0400 as excerpted:
>
>> USE=gui or something like that if the main effect is to have a gui or
>> not.
>> That is the sort of thing that SHOULD g
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 5:03 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
>
> I like the general 'gtk' flag we generally use to choose *which*
> toolkit, and local USE flags for specific versions, if they are
> supported. But in that case, the general gtk flag should be
> interpreted as the latest version supported
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 2:21 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 09/10/2015 08:15 PM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
>>
>> tldr: If the problem is USE flags, let's talk USE flags. If it's
>> supporting more than one toolkit in general, I see no reason not to
>> let maintainers use their discretion and not force thei
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 2:05 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 09/10/2015 07:17 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>>
>>> Given the fact that we are short on manpower and that most part of the
>>> linux ecosystem is moving towards gtk3... there has been no good
>>> argument
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 12:57 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 09/10/2015 04:31 PM, Vadim A. Misbakh-Soloviov wrote:
>> WE HAVE NO RIGHT TO DICTATE users what they should use and what they should
>> not.
>
> You should really either reconsider your understanding of opensource or
> start to pay me.
>
> Gen
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 11:41 AM, Alec Warner wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 8:35 AM, hasufell wrote:
>>
>>
>> If this affects tree consistency and usability, then it is not just up
>> to the maintainers.
>
> There are lots of topics where I concede that QA has a point and can utilize
> its i
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> The happy end result is, sometimes user has choice between 'working
> package' and 'package randomly segfaulting when you least expect it'.
> Of course, it's all hidden nicely under USE=gtk2 and USE=gtk3, so just
> *maybe* if you have the ti
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 8:53 AM, hasufell wrote:
>
> So we are breaking consistency and introduce maintenance and
> configuration complexity, because we want to support a corner case that
> isn't consistently supported anyway and will not be (because that's what
> the gnome team said and most upst
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 8:33 AM, hasufell wrote:
>
> So this makes no sense, since it's already an unsupported corner case.
Just what use of Gentoo do you not consider an unsupported corner
case, which isn't already better supported by some other distro?
The whole point of using Gentoo is having
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 8:13 AM, hasufell wrote:
> On 09/10/2015 02:03 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>
>> Suppose you want to run on a non-embedded system with limited RAM and the
>> ability to choose means you can use one of the two libraries
>> exclusively, thus elimi
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 6:50 AM, hasufell wrote:
> On 09/10/2015 12:45 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 4:47 AM, hasufell wrote:
>>> On 09/10/2015 08:21 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
>>>>
>>>> For me to not support gtk2 in the spacef
On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 4:47 AM, hasufell wrote:
> On 09/10/2015 08:21 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
>>
>> For me to not support gtk2 in the spacefm ebuild would be providing a
>> package inferior to upstream.
>
> That sounds like spacefm with gtk3 is lacking anything. It is not.
> Providing choice f
On Mon, Sep 7, 2015 at 3:51 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
>
> On 05/09/15 14:53, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> I was suggesting that somebody talk to the portage developers about
>> how they intend to implement EAPI6
> We don't know. But our tardiness should not retard the deve
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 8:46 AM, hasufell wrote:
> On 09/05/2015 02:42 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 5 Sep 2015, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>
>>> I certainly support the principle, but for the sake of transparency
>>> can we try to coordinate
On Sat, Sep 5, 2015 at 6:46 AM, Julian Ospald wrote:
> This is particularly useful for people who run alternative
> package managers and want to control their configuration.
I certainly support the principle, but for the sake of transparency
can we try to coordinate this so that the setting name
On Wed, Sep 2, 2015 at 2:28 AM, Eray Aslan wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 03:24:05PM +0200, Lars Wendler wrote:
>> * We should really get heimdal and mit-krb5 packages in a shape where
>> we can install them in parallel [2]. Using the bundled heimdal from
>> samba is no valid option [3]
>
>
On Mon, Aug 31, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Alec Warner wrote:
>>
>> Mostly, because when I see "A version is bumped" I immediately expect
>> to know which version the bump is to, but have to dig out the diff to
>> find out.
>>
>
> So I thought we used to have scripts that would dig out this information and
On Sun, Aug 23, 2015 at 8:01 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
>
> Any news on when git repo with historical commits will be
> available? Or am I missing something and it is already online?
>
I have no news on anything official but I've posted one at:
https://github.com/gentoo/gentoo-gitmig-20150809-dr
On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 4:47 PM, hasufell wrote:
> So my point stands. Games require their own set of policies (and ebuild
> writing guidelines).
I think we're somewhat talking past each other. I'm not debating that
it may be beneficial for games to have some specific policies, and
those should
On Saturday, August 22, 2015, hasufell wrote:
>
>
> Games differ in a lot of ways and they _require_ different policies. In
> some cases this also means more lax policies and in some cases more
> strict policies.
>
> An example is unbundling libraries. While unbundling libraries is often
> a good
On Sat, Aug 22, 2015 at 3:33 AM, Daniel Campbell (zlg) wrote:
>
> Great question on the 'cdinstall' flag. Games from Humble Bundle and
> GOG are basically fetch-restricted and require the user to put the
> relevant distfile in /usr/portage/distfiles to install. 'cdinstall'
> could be applied only
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 2:17 PM, hasufell wrote:
>
> I don't know. Stick to your word, maybe?
I'm glad we have you here to be our conscience. :)
I'm sure this will go on the next agenda. However, the decision to
kick the can was actually an intentional one. We were hoping to see
more interest
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:10 AM, hasufell wrote:
> On 08/21/2015 08:50 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>> On Fri, 21 Aug 2015, hasufell wrote:
>>
>>> Like allowing that devs may or may not use games.eclass, so that
>>> users cannot expect consistent behavior for games anymore?
>>
>> Sorry, but th
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 11:27 AM, hasufell wrote:
> On 08/21/2015 02:04 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> Right now there isn't even a functional games team to leave alone, and
>> this isn't just about games.
>>
>
> Exactly. Start there, instead of having the counci
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> As an old-school gamer and someone who runs dedicated servers and have
> done so for years, I disagree. So would a lot of gamers.
As an old-school gamer I think the USE=client/server thing makes a lot
of sense.
So would a lot of gamers
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 6:31 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> The eclass isn't officially deprecated, but it probably should be.
> You should install a game just like you'd install a word-processor or
> a web browser. It is just another desktop application (99% of the
> time).
U
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 3:16 AM, Sergey Popov wrote:
>
>
> While i am all for unification, i do not think that this is the case,
> where QA should be involved. "Dedicated server" is established phrase,
> that all users, who wants to maintain such services, know. So, i do not
> think that our dire
On Fri, Aug 21, 2015 at 4:31 AM, Daniel Campbell (zlg) wrote:
> Based on what I'm seeing in this thread, the problem seems to center
> around the description and application of the `dedicated` flag. I'm
> fully in favor of the `server` and `client` flags because they're
> clear and consistent.
++
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 6:18 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 08/21/2015 12:06 AM, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote:
>> This seems quite reasonable, and I welcome QA's efforts at maintaining
>> uniformity and cleanliness.
>>
++
I'd rather see groups like QA making proposals to improve cross-Gentoo
consistency t
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 2:03 PM, hasufell wrote:
> On 08/20/2015 07:42 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>> As an alternative, we would use USE=client and USE=server along with
>> proper IUSE defaults to control client & server builds appropriately.
>> Both flags use positive logic, and REQUIRED_USE='|| ( c
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 3:09 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
>
> It does not other the the metadata.dtd file it checks for updates and
> updates itself with. But that is very likely to change with the
> rewrite I have in progress (albeit slowly). I have also seriously been
> contemplating splitting off
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 2:09 PM, hasufell wrote:
> Signed-off-by has a completely different purpose which is not part of
> our workflow, so that tag is pretty useless to us most of the time.
>
> See https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Talk:Gentoo_git_workflow#Sign-Off
>
I agree. Generally it is used to
On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 2:12 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>
> Ebuild:
> - User copies .ebuild with expanded $Id$ to /usr/local/portage/...
> - User modifies local ebuild copy
> - User submits changed ebuild to bugzilla
> - Developer uses Header/Id to figure out what to base a diff on for
> mergin
On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 9:47 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
wrote:
> On 8/16/15 3:29 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> They are deprecated already:
>> https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/tree/metadata/layout.conf
>>
>> Deprecated means stop adding them, and move away
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Raymond Jennings wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>>
>> Finally, the gentoo developer quiz -should- still contain questions
>> about ancient stuff. There are still EAPI0 and EAPI2 ebuilds in the
>> tree at least.
>
>
> Why not de
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 8:44 AM, Peter Stuge wrote:
>
> $ git ls-tree HEAD README
> 100644 blob 08ae16956b8944da2fef75fee892dcba457cf4f0README
> $
>
> $ (stat --printf='blob %s\0' README; cat README) | sha1sum
> 08ae16956b8944da2fef75fee892dcba457cf4f0 -
> $
>
> This is so simple to generate
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 7:24 AM, hasufell wrote:
>
> No one has proven that git is cryptographically insecure. Everyone
> claiming that probably refers to
> https://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2012/10/when_will_we_se.html and
> the fact that we don't sign blob objects.
>
> While that is somethi
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 5:32 AM, Jauhien Piatlicki wrote:
>
> I remember some discussions about ideas to make the tree more for core
> packages and overlay for specialized stuff. How did we decided finally
> what is better: having specialized stuff in overlays, or moving it to
> the tree when it i
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 8:45 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
>
>>
>> 2. The question is why manifests are modified for rsync. In git
>> manifests are thin (only distfiles are there), in rsync they also
>> contain checksums for ebuilds and files dir content. Do we really
>> need this? These manife
On Fri, Aug 14, 2015 at 2:01 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> Don't ask me. I was against keeping the official listings in MediaWiki,
> I already complained that we can't list developers who are refusing to
> create a Wiki account and that we lack any proper API to access those
> listings.
>
Agree wit
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 8:38 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 13 Aug 2015 17:29, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 3:55 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
>> > I'd like to start with: kudos for the very skilfully performed migration
>> > from CVS
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 7:28 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 03:59:37PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>> > The intent is that the ONLY place the keywords are expanded, will be in
>> > the
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 3:55 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
wrote:
> I'd like to start with: kudos for the very skilfully performed migration
> from CVS to git! I just committed a simple changed and it worked great.
>
> I was curious and started exploring the repo a little bit, and the
> initial commit s
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 3:43 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
>
> The intent is that the ONLY place the keywords are expanded, will be in
> the rsync export. FUTURE tense, it's not ready yet.
>
Will that include any case where the string "$Id$" appears in a patch file?
That is the main source of prob
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 12:12 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 13 Aug 2015 10:36, William Hubbs wrote:
>> I understood the usefulness of this line to some when we were using CVS
>> since it expanded into the ebuild revision, date, etc.
>>
>> This expansion doesn't take place under git, so now I don'
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Ben de Groot wrote:
> I vote for a simple
>
> Bug: 333531
>
> If it is going to be any longer than that, then you need to make sure
> it is part of the commit message template magic. Because I'm surely
> not the only one who is lazy and thus averse to typing anythi
On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 5:26 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Aug 2015 09:12:30 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Now that we have the official git repository, I've switched user-facing
>> git mirrors from rsync->git to the real git. As a result, users are now
>> complaining that some
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 3:13 PM, Gregory Woodbury wrote:
> Is a possible solution something like an eselect module to indicate
> the preferred
> interface kit? It could default to any package that is available with
> a sequential
> set of preferred order.
> Then ebuild would consult the eselect mo
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Matthias Maier wrote:
>
>> constantly adds any security to the tree. What might add security for
>> end-users is if git automatically checked the push signatures, which
>> are the signatures that ensure that branches aren't tampered with
>> (which is what rebasin
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:42 AM, Michael Palimaka
wrote:
> On 12/08/15 00:29, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>
>> I realize this is frustrating and contentious, but I think we're
>> better off hashing this out, and implementing something reasonable,
>> than having a bazi
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> I would not say "caution" so much as good judgment. The first example that
> came to mind was working with the profiles which crosses many directories
> and files. In the past when I did restructuring to the hardened profiles, I
> test
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 9:39 AM, Sergey Popov wrote:
> 11.08.2015 16:30, Michael Palimaka пишет:
>>
>> Don't forget that as a project with no special authority, Qt's policy
>> remains a suggestion for the vast majority of maintainers. If someone
>> wishes to provide support for only one Qt version
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 9:42 AM, Sergey Popov wrote:
> 11.08.2015 16:36, Rich Freeman пишет:
>> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Sergey Popov wrote:
>>> 11.08.2015 16:11, James Le Cuirot пишет:
>>>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 15:58:49 +0300
>>>> Sergey Popov
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 8:26 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 10:29:55 +0200
> Alexander Berntsen wrote:
>> On 10/08/15 22:59, Aaron W. Swenson wrote:
>> > Users can fetch/pull from Github.
>> Users should not have to interface with or rely on proprietary
>> software to use Gentoo
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 9:19 AM, Sergey Popov wrote:
> 11.08.2015 16:11, James Le Cuirot пишет:
>> On Tue, 11 Aug 2015 15:58:49 +0300
>> Sergey Popov wrote:
>>
>>> If both of flags are not set - we stick to default.
>>> Should this be set in EVERY ebuild explicitly?
>>>
>>> Maybe provide some sug
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:07 AM, Kent Fredric wrote:
>
> Having a quality infrastructure should happen in parallel to github mirrors.
>
> Uses may use the proprietary one or the opensource one.
>
While I generally tend to agree with you, if we're just talking about
mirroring is this a real proble
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 5:12 AM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> On 11 August 2015 at 20:57, Tobias Klausmann wrote:
>>
>> The cat/pn rule is tricky anyway: what if one commit touches 100
>> packages? Or should that be split into 100 commits for easier
>> partial rollback?
>
>>> **if the change affects mul
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 11:44 PM, Matthias Maier wrote:
>> That is, I was under the impression signing a tag only signs the
>> references themselves, and then relies on SHA1 referential integrity
>> beyond that.
>
> No, a signed tag verifies that the whole integrirty of the entire
> repository, wh
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 11:04 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>
> Expanding on this: the rsync master creates the following
> files/directories under metatdata. On my own system, I like to symlink
> them to locations outside my repo so that related portage features
> continue to work.
>
> I would like to
On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 9:40 PM, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> Hoping someone has the answer for me because I'm at a loss. I'm not
> canceling the operating or hitting any key after .
>
> $ git push --signed origin master
>
> You need a passphrase to unlock the secret key for
> user: "Doug Goldstein "
>
On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> X-Bug-URL: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=557022
How about just:
Bug-URL: xxx
or Bug: xxx
X- is not recommended as a prefix for the various reasons already
well-stated by the IETF in the previously-linked RFC.
--
Rich
On Sun, Aug 9, 2015 at 8:43 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 09 Aug 2015 14:54, Alexey Shvetsov wrote:
>> Hi all!
>
> please don't top post
>
>> Current repoman complains about headers in ebuilds
>>
>> >>> Creating Manifest for /home/alexxy/Gentoo/gentoo/sys-cluster/open-mx
>>ebuild.badheader
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 7:38 PM, Daniel Campbell (zlg) wrote:
>
> So say I want to have an ownCloud instance that provides a single /usr
> or /etc for any Gentoo system that wants it on my local network. Is
> that a use case that would benefit from this new mounting?
I suppose daemons that provide
On Mon, Aug 3, 2015 at 3:07 PM, Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> On Sunday 02 of August 2015 21:37:36 Rich Freeman wrote:
> | The approach qt4=qt4
> | and qt5=qt5 seems simpler on the surface, but it means that users end
> | up having to set tons of per-package configurations whe
On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 11:24 PM, Ben de Groot wrote:
>> I want to use fooplayer and bargrapher which are two qt-based
>> applications. fooplayer only supports qt4, and bargrapher only
>> supports qt5. What USE flags should I set, without restorting to
>> per-package flags?
>
> These packages wou
On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 9:03 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> I find setting USE="qt4 -qt5" a lot more obvious than having USE="qt" (why not
> USE="X" ?) which then does different things based on another useflag,
> sometimes. Maybe. It's horribly inconsistent and even might change result over
> time, whi
On Sun, Aug 2, 2015 at 2:21 PM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
>
> This is a clean solution for developers and maintainers, but not
> for ordinary users — they will confused by "qt qt4 qt5": "what is
> 'qt', how is it different from 'qt4' and 'qt5'. What you are really
> doing is implementing second-leve
On Mon, Jul 27, 2015 at 6:26 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>
> Some of the advantages of this approach are listed in the bug. Here are
> a few more I can think of.
>
As we discussed this is similar to the approach taken by systemd
(though it parses fstab and creates service files dynamically).
Some o
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 8:05 AM, Joakim Tjernlund
wrote:
>
> There can not be any manual merges after an SW update here.
>
> I started to look at INSTALL_MASK, what if I set INSTALL_MASK
> to point to all conf files I want to manage myself.
> Then /etc/inittab etc. will not be touched when updatin
On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 6:17 AM, Panagiotis Christopoulos
wrote:
>
> you can subscribe to gentoo-embedded mailing list and ask there, as your
> product
> is embedded. Also, man make.conf and search for CONFIG_PROTECT. If I
> understood
> you correctly, it may be what you need.
>
That list is ce
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 4:51 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> I personally don't think Gentoo needs installer as-is. However, I think
> we'd really benefit from having some kind of helper scripts / checklist
> of tasks to be done prior to/after install.
I think something that would be really useful is
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 1:56 PM, Brian Evans wrote:
>
> Developers and ebuild writers should reference virtual/libmysqlclient
> when linking against the libraries as the package will keep the
> subslot the same as the soversion for easy rebuilds.
This isn't super-relevant to the news item itself,
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 8:36 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
>>
>> I don't know tbh, most are already signed, with the git migration, the
>> strongly recommended commit signing will become MANDATORY.
>>
>> So,
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 12:42 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
>
> I don't know tbh, most are already signed, with the git migration, the
> strongly recommended commit signing will become MANDATORY.
>
> So, we are at 50 devs with valid gpg keys now, with 200 more gpg keys
> listed in LDAP that fail to meet
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 2:56 PM, hasufell wrote:
>
> I'm not sure if you followed my argumentation. I basically said that it
> is unrealistic to enforce a review-only workflow and that it should/can
> start within gentoo-internal projects. You are just repeating what I
> already said.
>
> My point
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 11:45 AM, Alec Warner wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 4:47 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>
>>
>
> So basically Gentoo Sunrise? :)
>
>> In any case, to some extent the review workflow already exists on the
>> proxy maintainer proje
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Tobias Klausmann wrote:
>
> What I meant is when I get a stabilization bug for
> cat-egory/foo-1.2.3 which depends on >=other-cat/bar-1.0.5. The
> latter is amd64 but not alpha or ~alpha. And it, in turn, has yet
> more deps in the same vein. Now I have several opt
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Rich Freeman wrote:
>> I suspect that trying to force it would basically end up putting
>> the entire distro on hold until most of the current devs quit,
>
> I think you're right. I also think those developers should
On Thu, Jul 9, 2015 at 5:31 AM, hasufell wrote:
>
> The quality problem is that we have too many developers. If you make
> community contributions easier, sane and more reliable (due to code
> review) then you solve several problems at once, because you need _less_
> developers. Are you aware that
On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 4:01 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
>
> I've been hearing lately that the newest versions of git allow you to
> sign pushes.
>
> Once we have a version of git stable that allows this, can someone fill
> me in on why we would need to sign commits if we sign pushes? If we have
> a s
On Sun, Jul 5, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Brian Dolbec wrote:
>
> I would think that there would be a very small number of branches to the
> main master tree. Those would be for the large projects like kde,
> gnome,... They would still do their development work in their
> overlays, then move them into a b
On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> C Bergström wrote:
>
>> 2) merge commits lead to multiple parents, which breaks a clean and
>> simple to follow linear history
>
> This is either a bug or a feature depending on whether development
> was actually linear. Sometimes it is, but som
On Sat, Jul 4, 2015 at 2:17 PM, C Bergström wrote:
>
> What I personally prefer is a rebase workflow.
The recommendation is to rebase when practical.
Rebasing makes the history look clean, but it sometimes does this by
obscuring the real history. It also discards original author commits
with th
On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 7:10 PM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
>
> We have a rule of "one year compatibility period". ChangeLog shows
> that git-2.2.0 was introduced on 02 Dec 2014. So pushed commits
> can't be enforced before 02 Dec 2015. (And yes, my laptop
> still uses an older version, that's why I w
On Fri, Jul 3, 2015 at 5:40 PM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 04, 2015 at 12:19:41AM +0300, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
>> As I see from git docs only commits and tags may be signed. There
>> is no way to sign a push. Moreover there is no need to sign each
>> commit, see what Linux says on tha
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 3:12 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 14:38:35 -0400
> Rich Freeman wrote:
>>
>> These errors are not user-visible. I really don't have a problem with
>> repoman errors for deprecated features.
>>
>
> I don't h
On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 12:55 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Jun 2015 18:33:36 +0200
> Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>
>> >> Maintainers can still use --force if there is no other way.
>>
>> > i'm definitely not convinced it is good practice to encourage people
>> > to do that ;)
>>
>> People are
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 10:32 AM, Niels Dettenbach (Syndicat.com)
wrote:
>
>> Am 23.05.2015 um 16:20 schrieb Rich Freeman :
>>
>> With Gmail I can have an email with 14 tags. Via IMAP it shows up as
>> if it were in 14 folders at the same time. It is a bit kludg
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 9:34 AM, Niels Dettenbach (Syndicat.com)
wrote:
>
>> Am 23.05.2015 um 15:07 schrieb Rich Freeman :
>>
>> Well, besides not being browser-based as far as I can tell, without
>> integration with the IMAP server those emails in multiple dire
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Andrew Savchenko wrote:
>
> Sylpheed supports filters which allow you to have e-mails in
> multiple directories based on arbitrary user-defined filtering.
> It supports IMAP also, though I never use it as I prefer POP3 and
> SMTP.
>
Well, besides not being browser
On Sat, May 23, 2015 at 2:18 AM, J. Roeleveld wrote:
> On 11 May 2015 15:59:40 CEST, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>
>>I'd REALLY like to see a FOSS alternative to Gmail (a good one, that
>>is), and ditto for Google docs (or whatever the latest branding for
>>that is)
On Fri, May 15, 2015 at 2:32 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>
> The new item doesn't really cover this much -- that the feature is for
> supporting storage and synchronization of the gentoo repo on squashfs
> rather than on a regular filesystem. Perhaps it would be enough to
> link to an article des
On Thu, May 14, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Jack Morgan wrote:
> My over
> plan is to reduce the total number of keyworded packages to a more
> maintainable level.
Many thanks. This is really the best possible solution. Arch teams
can stabilize packages at their discretion, and if they get in over
their h
On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 1:19 AM, Eray Aslan wrote:
>
> The correct solution is to stop forwarding spam and the easiest way is
> just stopping forwarding. There are valid policy reasons for not going
> that route but continuing forwarding because it is too difficult to
> configure gmail is, well,
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 11:21 AM, C Bergström wrote:
> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 9:59 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 10:44 AM, C Bergström
>> wrote:
>>> What I'm describing is not "gmail" - it's everything that gmail has
>>
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 10:44 AM, C Bergström wrote:
> What I'm describing is not "gmail" - it's everything that gmail has
> and offers, but @gentoo.org domain. I'm using it right now in fact.
>
> You get the web interface, IMAP, POP, 2 token authentication (if you
> want to enabled it) and lots o
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 9:37 AM, C Bergström wrote:
> Sorry to shoot and run, but I think you're trying to tackle this
> problem in the wrong way. The problem isn't to drop the mail. The
> solution is to change email hosting providers. As a non-profit I
> believe Google hosted apps would be an opt
On Sat, May 2, 2015 at 4:20 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote:
> On Fri, 1 May 2015 11:28:52 -0400
> Mike Gilbert wrote:
>
>> Due to popular demand, I have added a basic systemd profile for amd64:
>
> what about we start telling people /etc/make.profile can be a dir
> and that you can fill the 'parent' fi
On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 5:59 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote:
>
> Currently, a problem is that everybody uses different formatting
> for stabilization bug reports making them more difficult to be parsed.
>
For clarity, are we talking about parsing by a human brain, or parsing
by a computer program?
If the
801 - 900 of 2195 matches
Mail list logo
