[gentoo-dev] Last rites: dev-python/couchdb-python

2020-11-05 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
# Dirkjan Ochtman (2020-11-05) # Incorrect DISTUTILS_USE_SETUPTOOLS value, dead upstream. # Removal in 30 days. Bug #748063 dev-python/couchdb-python

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH 2/3] virtual/cargo: drop virtual

2019-10-26 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sat, Oct 26, 2019, 05:59 Kent Fredric wrote: > On Fri, 25 Oct 2019 15:03:39 -0700 > Georgy Yakovlev wrote: > > > not used anymore > > > > Closes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/695698 > > Signed-off-by: Georgy Yakovlev > > > Its likely this removal will cause the same kinds of problems faced by >

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] cargo.eclass: add cargo_live_src_unpack()

2019-08-29 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Thu, Aug 29, 2019 at 7:26 AM Georgy Yakovlev wrote: > This function will allow using 'cargo fetch' during src_fetch > Since only new cargo supports that, all live packages will > have to depend on >=rust-1.37.0 > > Looks okay to me. Regards, Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] CPU_FLAGS_X86: Introduce 'sha' flag

2019-07-18 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Thu, Jul 18, 2019, 15:53 Michał Górny wrote: > Introduce 'sha' flag that corresponds to SHA-NI instruction set. > This has two potential users, and is present in git version > of cpuid2cpuflags (pending release once the flag is added). > A bit of bikeshedding: as I understand it, SHA-NI

[gentoo-dev] Gentoo on Discord

2019-04-29 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
In this article on chat services used for OSS: https://catfox.life/2019/04/28/keeping-libre-software-accessible-to-all/ I was surprised to see a mention of Gentoo as a project that uses "Discord as an official method of communication". When I searched, I indeed found

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH] eclass: add rust-toolchain.eclass

2018-10-15 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
Signed-off-by: Dirkjan Ochtman --- eclass/rust-toolchain.eclass | 120 +++ 1 file changed, 120 insertions(+) create mode 100644 eclass/rust-toolchain.eclass diff --git a/eclass/rust-toolchain.eclass b/eclass/rust-toolchain.eclass new file mode 100644 index

Re: [gentoo-dev] Signed-off-by verification incoming

2018-09-29 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 4:52 PM Thomas Deutschmann wrote: > I agree. Communication was bad. We should have included dev howto with > that announcement. > Thanks for the helpful pointers! Regards, Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] Signed-off-by verification incoming

2018-09-29 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 3:14 PM Jeroen Roovers wrote: > 0a) Explain to me how to fix my commits that I now can't push, or > 0b) disable that hook immediately. > Try git rebase -i and use "r" for "reword" on every commit. > 1) Update repoman to enforce it _before_ the commit is executed. >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Removing support for mercurial repos in repositories.xml

2018-09-24 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, Sep 23, 2018 at 10:42 PM Michał Górny wrote: > 2. Mercurial is buggy and maintaining support for those repos is PITA. > As a former Mercurial maintainer, I'm very skeptical of claims that Mercurial is that buggy or generally less well-maintained than Git. Still, reality is that Gentoo

[gentoo-dev] Package up for grabs: dev-db/couchdb

2018-08-09 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
While I have maintained this for a long time, I've been unhappy with upstream since they released 2.x with no proper Unix build system (there have also been a number of bundled dependencies that I have been unable to move them off of). There is a newly released remote code execution vulnerability,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Add rust eclass to support multi-target compilation

2018-07-31 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Tue, Jul 31, 2018 at 12:03 PM Luca Barbato wrote: > > As far as I know, the Rust ecosystem is largely bimodal: stuff is either > > compatible with stable and later, or it works only on nightly. It seems > > very rare that code is actually tied to a particular Rust release and > does > > not

Re: [gentoo-dev] Add rust eclass to support multi-target compilation

2018-07-31 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 5:02 PM gibix wrote: > This will allows projects like rustfmt, clippy, bindgen that need runtime > linking with the proper rust version to work correctly. Beyond this while > rust is getting older as project we will see more projects that will > require a specific rust

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: [QA] Ban policy introduction

2018-07-30 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Jul 30, 2018 at 8:52 AM Guilherme Amadio wrote: > If you introduce penalties for breaking prefix as well, I'm afraid many > people will be unnecessarily penalized. I think that such penalties are > counter productive in most cases. If someone is really being careless it > might make

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Repoman to warn about suspicious =-dependencies

2018-03-26 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 12:37 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > I think this cause the trouble of specifying '-r0' rather rarely, and it > will decrease the number of mistakes, also effectively making Gentoo > development easier. It is somewhat inspired by the handling of slot >

Re: [gentoo-dev] New category: app-metrics

2018-03-22 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 6:21 AM, Manuel Rüger wrote: > In addition, the following packages will drop their prometheus- prefix > during the package move: > > * net-analyzer/prometheus-blackbox_exporter > * net-analyzer/prometheus-node_exporter > *

Re: [gentoo-dev] Is removing old EAPIs worth the churn?

2018-03-06 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 2:52 AM, Matt Turner wrote: > In the end we might get to delete some code from portage or an eclass? > Does this seem worth it? > To add to some of the points Kent made, I think so, yes: this means freeing us from the cognitive overhead of thinking

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Bugzilla arch list reordering

2018-01-23 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 12:46 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Since neither of the proposals has received any specific reply, I'm not > sure how to proceed from here. I suppose we can possibly have two lists > in different order so that people could use whichever they prefer. > Not

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: Portage Dynamic Deps

2018-01-22 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Jan 22, 2018 at 8:01 AM, Zac Medico wrote: > According to Gentoo policy, future ebuild dependency changes need to be > accompanied by a revision bump in order to trigger rebuilds for users. > Therefore, you should only need to use --changed-deps=y for a single > deep

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Bugzilla arch list reordering

2018-01-16 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 11:19 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > I disagree. I think most of the developers are used to the lexical sort, > and it keeps the order predictable. While I suppose keeping amd64 > and x86 alongside for the sake of being commonly used would make sense, > I

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Bugzilla arch list reordering

2018-01-16 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 11:01 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Besides regrouping, I've also reordered the keywords to use the same > sorting order as eshowkw (i.e. ppc before ppc64), moved 'BSD' into teams (in contrast to 'AMD64 FBSD' and 'X86 FBSD'), and added 'Prefix' team. > I

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Splitting developer-oriented and expert user mailing lists

2017-12-04 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 10:43 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On the face of it, I like this proposal. On the other hand, wouldn't it > be > > better if we just had more active list moderators? That is, moderators > who > > move problematic user's posts to moderated by default, and

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Splitting developer-oriented and expert user mailing lists

2017-12-03 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, Dec 3, 2017 at 12:18 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > 1. Posting to gentoo-dev@ and gentoo-project@ mailing lists will be > initially restricted to active Gentoo developers. > > 1a. Subscription (reading) and archives will still be open. > > 1b. Active Gentoo contributors

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC v2: news item for the 17.0 profiles

2017-11-28 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Tue, Oct 10, 2017 at 9:16 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > = > Title: New 17.0 profiles in the Gentoo repository > Author: Andreas K. Hüttel > Posted: xxx > Revision: 1 > News-Item-Format: 2.0 >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest2 hashes, take n+1-th

2017-10-20 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 11:23 AM, Ulrich Mueller <u...@gentoo.org> wrote: > >>>>> On Fri, 20 Oct 2017, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > > > As Hanno was saying, we'll have decades of warning before a break > > becomes practical, so I don't think this is a real con

Re: [gentoo-dev] Manifest2 hashes, take n+1-th

2017-10-20 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 12:49 AM, Gordon Pettey wrote: > On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Hanno Böck wrote: > >> On Thu, 19 Oct 2017 21:08:40 +0200 >> Michał Górny wrote: >> >> > manifest-hashes = SHA512 SHA3_512 >> >>

[gentoo-dev] rust-toolchain.eclass RFC

2017-09-09 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
A contributor has written the following eclass: https://bugs.gentoo.org/attachment.cgi?id=464900 This would help extending support for Rust to other arches. As I'm not deeply familiar with writing eclasses, I'd welcome any feedback on this code. The general idea seems sane to me. Cheers,

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC pre-GLEP] Gentoo Git Workflow

2017-07-25 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > What do you think about it? Is there anything else that needs being > covered? > Looks good to me. Thanks for writing it up! Cheers, Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Future of gentoo's stable and unstable trees: what are your thoughts?

2017-07-25 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 11:22 PM, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: > TL;DR;TL;DR: > > > This email seeks for one step towards less toil tied to gentoo's > keywording/stabilization process. I've CCed a few groups who > might be interested in making this area better: > > -

[gentoo-dev] Re: Packages up for grabs

2017-06-28 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 12:58 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman <d...@gentoo.org> wrote: > I also want to drop the following: > > - dev-lang/erlang > - dev-vcs/hgsubversion I'll drop these to maintainer-needed by July 1st. Cheers, Dirkjan

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

2017-05-24 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 9:31 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > I'd like to request Infra to establish a new mailing list that would > fill in the gap between our public mailing lists and the gentoo-core > mailing list. I agree with the others who've said that they don't think this is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

2017-05-11 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 8:50 AM, David Seifert wrote: > 1. ppc(= 32 bit) will be massively dekeyworded, ppc64 will stay > unchanged (also given that it is an active arch in general and gets CPU > upgrades from IBM/OpenPOWER). Sounds good. You started the thread also talking

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] News item: GCC 6 defaults to USE="pie ssp", v2

2017-05-10 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > Sounds like a reasonable action plan. The consequences of such a change > definitely seems to be sufficiently high to merit a proper migration > plan which doesn't seem to have been established at this point.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

2017-05-10 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > I maintain quite a few ppc stage3's for uclibc and musl. I would > appreciate keeping ppc as is. It is still a useful arch for many > devices today, eg. some high end Mikrotik routers. So are you willing to do the

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

2017-05-08 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 12:49 PM, Mikle Kolyada wrote: > Against. Do not touch things you are not working on, council has already > dropped m68k s390 and sh to exp few years ago. Now we have a big mess > there and only, while ia64 sparc and co have slow but progress and >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Dropping ia64/ppc/sparc profiles to dev/exp

2017-05-07 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, May 7, 2017 at 9:23 PM, David Seifert wrote: > TL;DR > ia64/ppc/sparc teams are pretty much dead. They have been for a long > time and this won't change any time soon. Gentoo should focus its > resources on archs that are important and has the manpower to support. > Let

[gentoo-dev] Last rites: www-apache/mod_authnz_persona

2017-04-27 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
# Dirkjan Ochtman <d...@gentoo.org> (27 Apr 2017) # Persona service has been discontinued. Masked for removal in 30 days. www-apache/mod_authnz_persona

[gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

2017-04-27 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
The proxy maintainer for syncthing just resigned, anyone want to pick it up? - net-p2p/syncthing I also want to drop the following: - dev-lang/erlang - dev-vcs/hgsubversion (All should be in a fairly good state right now.) Cheers, Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] Reverse use of Python/Ruby versions

2017-04-10 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Apr 10, 2017 at 8:37 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > It is always nice when a person who: Please stop the sarcasm. While I understand the reaction, the idea in itself does not seem totally crazy to me, and it seems useful to have a discussion on its merits. At the same

Re: [gentoo-dev] Tree signing and verification on the user side - status?

2017-04-04 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: >> while we're discussing super-strength hash algos, it would be cool to know >> what's still missing for >> * rsync-side manifest signing in whatever way >> * verification of such signatures in portage / emerge >> >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] New Manifest hashes and how to enable them

2017-04-03 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 7:09 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Your thoughts? This seems pretty hasty. First of all, SHA-256 should be safe for all intents and purposes, and for the foreseeable future. This is nothing like Git's usage of SHA-1, which was known to be on the way to

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Introducing stable profiles for arm64 (aarch64)

2017-02-06 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sat, Feb 4, 2017 at 6:26 AM, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > I am working towards having a clean deptree for arm64 and afterwards > marking the non-hardened 5 arm64 profiles stable (or 4 - I don't see > value in the developer profile without the desktop specific > subprofiles, until

Re: [gentoo-dev] Guidelines for IUSE defaults

2017-02-02 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 4:36 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > I'm not saying that we should have a minimal experience out-of-the-box, > only that the base profile should result in an effectively-minimal set > of USE flags. Adding IUSE defaults is essentially adding defaults to the >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Fwd: Cron <gmirror@dipper> /usr/local/bin/pidlock -s rsync-gen /bin/bash /usr/local/bin/mastermirror/rsync-gen.sh

2017-01-27 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
Wow, Michał, this email comes off as pretty harsh to me... Is that really necessary? On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 8:26 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > I should point out that: > > 1) CI is detecting this kind of issues much faster than you are, > and reporting them both to the committer

Re: [gentoo-dev] berkdb and gdbm in global USE defaults

2017-01-27 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 4:33 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > Looking through our profiles, I see we have both berkdb and gdbm > enabled "globally". > > default/linux/make.defaults:USE="berkdb crypt ipv6 ncurses nls pam > readline ssl tcpd zlib" > releases/make.defaults:USE="acl gdbm

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Common rsync-gen errors, why they happen, and what you can do about it

2017-01-18 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:04 AM, Kent Fredric wrote: > That's not viable, mostly because the performance cost of doing so is > significantly > time consuming, that it would block `git push` for minutes at a time, and all > users > performing pushes would have to wait in a

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Common rsync-gen errors, why they happen, and what you can do about it

2017-01-17 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 5:58 AM, Doug Freed wrote: > At some point, the repoman manifest-check, or some variation of it, > will probably get added to a post-receive hook, which will then abort > your push if you try to push something that would break the conversion > process.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Revision bumps vs git commits atomicity

2016-12-02 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Fri, Dec 2, 2016 at 4:14 PM, Andrew Savchenko wrote: > What about the following forkflow: > - version bump first with minimal changes required, but without > pushing commit to the tree; > - make each logical change as a separate commit without revision > bumps and without

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: /etc/hostname on gentoo

2016-08-22 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Aug 22, 2016 at 5:58 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > On Gentoo, this file does not exist, so I'm wondering how we can make it > exist? Not sure if/how related, but when I have: djc@enrai ~ $ cat /etc/conf.d/hostname # Set to the hostname of this machine hostname="enrai"

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-15 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:25 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: >> very different process from handling bugs and feature requests. It >> would be great if we had tooling that focuses on these instead of >> trying to fit into the bug tracker. It would entail a different > > I'm not

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-15 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 3:03 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > Could you please elaborate a bit? In particular from perspective of (i) > integration into current workflow, (ii) complexity in application > maintenance/hosting (iii) cost/benefit considerations Well, I think

Re: #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree)

2016-08-15 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 6:29 AM, Kent Fredric wrote: > This sort of stuff makes me feel bugzilla is entirely the wrong platform for > handling stabilizations and keywords :/ I very much agree; some kind of minimal web app/API would probably be better. Cheers, Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

2016-08-07 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, Aug 7, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > This packages are now up for grabs: > app-portage/euscan Patrick, Are you still keeping euscan running? Cheers, Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

2016-08-07 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, Aug 7, 2016 at 9:56 AM, Deven Lahoti wrote: > What's the policy on maintaining a package if I'm not (yet, hopefully) an > official dev? I'd like to take on transmission-remote-gtk since I use it > fairly often. That would be great! I think you want to start by looking at

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: new global use flag: luajit

2016-07-15 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Thu, Jul 14, 2016 at 4:34 PM, William Hubbs wrote: >> I'd rather avoid adding more of this until we figure out what to do >> about multiple Lua versions. The Lua5.1/5.2 split is still stuck >> nowhere, and luajit is yet another variant to handle. > > If we don't do this,

Re: [gentoo-dev] man pages: build or copy?

2016-07-09 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote: > I've created an ebuild for net-misc/zerotier [1]. This has a BDEP on > app-text/ronn, the build system uses it to create the man pages. The > trouble is that ronn is a Ruby program and pulls in a shedload of >

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

2016-06-10 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 3:06 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > How do you know? What is your experience in the area of coordinating > work across repos in a Gentoo-style distribution? I don't have much experience with ebuilds, but I have plenty of experience with

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

2016-06-09 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Thu, Jun 9, 2016 at 12:22 PM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > If you mean that we should go with what is currently popular, then > that would be Microsoft Windows, Mac OS X, and to a lesser degree > Ubuntu. But I'm not sure what that mental exercise affords us. I am > more

Re: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project

2016-06-07 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Tue, Jun 7, 2016 at 5:37 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > I'm against keeping it in repos.xml for more than a month, considering > the current (huge) state of breakage it is in. Other repositories with > similar breakage were already removed. Maybe do a regular old "Packages for

Re: [gentoo-dev] The future of the Sunrise project

2016-06-07 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 11:23 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Your thoughts? I would agree that proxy-maint and GH pull requests are better than sunrise, and so we should probably sunset (pun intended) the latter. Cheers, Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] Can ATs add missing test deps?

2016-06-06 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 12:36 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: >> It happens every now and then that during ATing, I find that >> USE=test should pull in extra deps. This usually is an easy and >> not exactly controversial fix. > > +1 > > I dont think anyone should be prevented from

Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Masterplan for solving LINGUAS problems

2016-06-01 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 3:09 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Excuse me but are you really serious? We are in this swamp because someone > tried to be too smart. And what solution do you propose? Let's add another > layer of complexity and smartness, for a single variable. Obviously

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

2016-05-29 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > dev-python/path-and-address I've added the python project here, too. Cheers, Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs

2016-05-29 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, May 29, 2016 at 4:16 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > dev-python/pylast I've added the python project for this one. Cheers, Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] Package up for grabs

2016-05-22 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, May 22, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > dev-python/pathtools > dev-python/pygame_sdl2 > dev-python/pyuv > dev-python/watchdog I think the Python team can take pathtools and watchdog. Not so sure about pyuv and pygame_sdl2, though. Cheesr, Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Overlays project needs you!

2016-05-17 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On May 17, 2016 8:45 AM, "Michał Górny" wrote: > For this reason, I would like to ask others to join the Overlays effort. Sign me up, let's see what happens. Cheers, Dirkjan

[gentoo-dev] Re: USE flag proposal: memcached

2016-05-16 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sat, May 14, 2016 at 5:19 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman <d...@gentoo.org> wrote: > I suppose the description can just be "Enable memcached support". I went ahead and committed a slightly modified description to use.desc. I also filed bugs against lighttpd (583158) and gearmand

Re: [gentoo-dev] NEW: split portage/repoman releases now in the tree

2016-05-16 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 3:39 AM, Brian Dolbec wrote: > repoman-2.3.0_rc1 is the stage2 rewrite code. The checks are now > modular, and using the portage plugin system. The system is not yet > fully plug and play. Those changes will take place in the stage3 > re-writes. Thanks

[gentoo-dev] USE flag proposal: memcached

2016-05-14 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
All, I want to add a "memcached" USE flag to mail-filters/rmilter. Before doing so, I looked if there was a global USE flag. There is not, but I though see usage across 14 packages: dev-db/pgpool2[memcached]: Use memcached for query caching dev-php/pecl-mysqlnd_qc[memcached]: Use

Re: [gentoo-dev] On banning merge commits

2016-05-08 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > No, he didn't. He stated an imaginary fact ('we all seem to agree...'), and > asked how to *enforce* that formally. That's not how you request differing > opinions. He used "seem to" to state that it was his perspective,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: On banning merge commits

2016-05-08 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 11:25 AM, Kent Fredric wrote: > The essential idea being to minimise the amount of congnitive effort a > human has when trying to explore the history and understand what > "actually happened" from a master perspective. > > "Long histories that go for

Re: [gentoo-dev] On banning merge commits

2016-05-08 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, May 8, 2016 at 7:09 AM, Michał Górny wrote: >> What is the correct course of action? I would very much like it to be worded >> in >> a document (GLEP and/or Wiki page) so that confusion is avoided and we all >> are >> on the same page on this topic. > > You start by

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] metadata.xsd: upstream maintainer must have exactly one element

2016-05-06 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 10:14 AM, Göktürk Yüksek wrote: > The change only reflects what's already in GLEP 68 [0] which itself > derives this condition from GLEP 46 [1] which has the following clause: > > """ > name should contain a block of text with upstream's name, is

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] metadata.xsd: upstream maintainer must have exactly one element

2016-05-06 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 1:16 AM, Göktürk Yüksek wrote: > Signed-off-by: Göktürk Yüksek > --- > metadata.xsd | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/metadata.xsd b/metadata.xsd > index 8bc6a4e..fe2c5d2 100644 > ---

Re: [gentoo-dev] Automated Package Removal and Addition Tracker, for the week ending 2016-04-24 23:59 UTC

2016-04-26 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 2:05 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Removals: > dev-go/ed25519 20160421-13:04 blueness 1b62db0 > dev-go/goptlib 20160421-13:04 blueness 1b62db0 > dev-go/siphash 20160421-13:04 blueness

Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc 2.23 and willfully breaking stuff

2016-04-19 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Apr 19, 2016 6:28 PM, "Anthony G. Basile" wrote: > yeah we need to buy him a drink or something really. i'd say make him a > dev but i'm not sure i'd inflict that punishment on anyone :P +1 make him a dev. Cheers, Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grab

2016-03-31 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 1:17 PM, Alexey Shvetsov wrote: > dev-python/configshell > dev-python/rtslib I looked at whether these should be owned by the Python team, but I don't think they should be. It looks like they're low-level utilities that happen to be written in Python.

Re: [gentoo-dev] metadata.xml GLEP for review

2016-03-19 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Wed, Mar 16, 2016 at 7:43 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Therefore, I've been slowly writing a proper GLEP that would describe > all of metadata.xml in detail. Here's the current draft for review: Sounds like a good idea! > https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:MGorny/GLEP:68 I

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH dtd] Remove outdated definition of global-scope

2016-03-02 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 12:38 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Remove the long form of element that was likely used (or > supposed to be used) in the global metadata scope. It is currently > referenced in element only, and judging from the comments, > it is supposed to always be a

Re: [gentoo-dev] libressl: proposing a new project and calling for help

2016-02-15 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, Feb 14, 2016 at 10:38 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote: > We discussed the state of libressl today in the council. Proceeding > forward with that work, I'm going to propose a new project and getting > together a team. Much of the work has already done by hasufell and

Re: [gentoo-dev] New USE_EXPAND NGINX_MODULES_STREAM

2016-02-04 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Thu, Feb 4, 2016 at 11:27 AM, Jason Zaman wrote: > Which looks easier and nicer to you? > > NGINX_MODULES_HTTP="access auth_basic autoindex browser charset > fancyindex fastcgi geo gzip limit_req limit_zone map memcached proxy > realip referer rewrite scgi spdy

Re: [gentoo-dev] New USE_EXPAND NGINX_MODULES_STREAM

2016-02-04 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Wed, Feb 3, 2016 at 11:48 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Could we please finally stop introducing global USE flags that are > going to only be used by a single package? make.conf already looks like > random mix of randoms these days, with some extra random cruft being > added

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-project] Call for Agenda Items -- Council Meeting 2016-02-14

2016-02-03 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Justin Lecher (jlec) wrote: > Could you please sum up the thread and come up with some precise > question we should discuss or vote on. The question is: what language should we use for XML validation in the future? There are two main contenders:

Re: [gentoo-dev] New schema language for metadata validation?

2016-01-27 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 4:43 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Yes, that part makes some sense. Except that it immediately follows > braces which makes me think it applies only to the thing in the braces. > Furthermore, the use of {} vs () seems pretty much random, and the & > is

Re: [gentoo-dev] New schema language for metadata validation?

2016-01-27 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 4:20 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > First of all, I don't like RELAX-NG Compact at all. It looks like > someone tried hard to combine some variation of BNF, DOCTYPE > and something else in order to get something that is both readable > and compact. And got a

Re: [gentoo-dev] New schema language for metadata validation?

2016-01-27 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 9:52 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: > I would appreciate examples of some common tasks like validating > projects.xml, but since we don't have those now, it's not critical. > This used to be kinda straightforward with xmllint, > > $ xmllint --valid --noout

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: News item: Upgrading Apache from 2.2 to 2.4

2016-01-27 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 3:20 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > Advanced notice, please Committed 2016-01-27-upgrading-to-apache-2_4 to news. Time to request stabilization? Cheers, Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] New schema language for metadata validation?

2016-01-27 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:09 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Could you post a generated .rng and XML Schema files for comparison? > They don't have to be perfect conversions, just to see how different > they are. Here's the RNG, generated with dev-python/rnc2rng:

Re: [gentoo-dev] New schema language for metadata validation?

2016-01-27 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 3:21 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >> But libxml2 does not seem to support it; that is, substituting the >> DOCTYPE for an xml-model processing instruction and then using xmllint >> --valid does not do the right thing (it complains there's no DOCTYPE). > >

[gentoo-dev] New schema language for metadata validation?

2016-01-26 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
All, TL;DR: I think we should switch from DTD to RELAX NG (compact syntax, ideally) for our XML validation needs. It is more expressive and more readable. Most people who know anything about XML stuff know that DTDs are not that great a solution for validation. Their expression power is very

Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoostats

2016-01-24 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 4:59 PM, Andreas K. Hüttel wrote: > Gentoostats is a typical stillbirth of the Gentoo Google Summer of Soon- > Obsolete Code. Would I be happy if someone were to revive and actually deploy > it (the last point is important!)? YES! When I last looked

[gentoo-dev] Re: News item: Upgrading Apache from 2.2 to 2.4

2016-01-20 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 6:13 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman <d...@gentoo.org> wrote: > After what feels like ages, we're just about ready to stabilize > apache-2.4. Since this is a major upgrade that in many cases require > configuration changes, we wanted to do a news item. After some > di

[gentoo-dev] Re: News item: Upgrading Apache from 2.2 to 2.4

2016-01-17 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
Second attempt! === Title: Upgrading Apache from 2.2 to 2.4 Author: Dirkjan Ochtman <d...@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain Posted: 2016-01-17 Revision: 1 News-Item-Format: 1.0 Display-If-Installed: www-servers/apache With the 2.4 branch released by upstream almost 4 years ago, stable

Re: [gentoo-dev] Herd likely up for grabs: lang-misc

2016-01-17 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, Jan 17, 2016 at 8:59 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > dev-lang/erlang : djc@ erlang only gets whatever is necessary to keep bug reporters happy, plus whatever I need to keep couchdb running. Please feel free to join up if you have any related expertise

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: News item: Upgrading Apache from 2.2 to 2.4

2016-01-14 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: >> Display-If-Installed: www-servers/apache > > Can't that be made 2.4 need a news item about something they've already taken care of? This makes sense to me, though I imagine it could be annoying if people (stupidly, but

[gentoo-dev] News item: Upgrading Apache from 2.2 to 2.4

2016-01-13 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
Apache from 2.2 to 2.4 Author: Dirkjan Ochtman <d...@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain Posted: 2016-01-13 Revision: 1 News-Item-Format: 1.0 Display-If-Installed: www-servers/apache Upstream released the 2.4 version of the Apache HTTPD almost 4 years ago. Though many users have moved to othe

Re: [gentoo-dev] packages to grab

2016-01-08 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 2:50 PM, Justin Lecher (jlec) wrote: > due to changes in real life I need to cut back vastly my day to day > maintainer work starting in February. So far I have no clue how much > time I can devote to Gentoo in nearer future. Sad to see this happen! I'm

Re: [gentoo-dev] packages to grab

2016-01-08 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Thu, Jan 7, 2016 at 4:40 PM, Matthew Thode wrote: > gonna take these unless anyone yells at me. > > modified: dev-python/ipaddress/metadata.xml > modified: dev-python/lz4/metadata.xml > modified: dev-python/mysqlclient/metadata.xml It

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: automatically mailing people on pkgcheck problems with their packages

2015-12-06 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 3:36 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > So what do you think? Would it be fine to mail the package maintainers > whenever their packages break? Would it be a problem if I just CC-ed > all the maintainers on the gentoo-automated-testing mails? Please note > that

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

2015-11-22 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Sun, Nov 22, 2015 at 4:54 PM, Michael Palimaka wrote: > On 22/11/15 05:51, Andrew Savchenko wrote: > Is the state of stable really that bad? I see this sentiment a lot. > > I run mostly-stable systems and rarely have an issue with old/missing > packages (but I'm involved

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Gentoo-hosted code review

2015-11-02 Thread Dirkjan Ochtman
On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 2:04 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote: > The way I see it, keeping review and committing/pushing separate is a > good thing, and removes a lot of the concerns about hosting a review > platform as it is sufficient with read-access to repositories. > > Thanks

  1   2   3   4   >