Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance
On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 13:33, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > Arfrever, it would be nice if you could answer these questions. > > If there's no answer, we should just go ahead and last-rite the entire > category. FYI, I discussed this with Arfrever. The python overlay will be retired in favor of a new overlay where Arfrever (and anyone wanting to help out!) can continue to work on both all of the net-zope stuff and probably some python stuff that he is interested in. Cheers, Dirkjan
Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance
On 08/29/11 13:33, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 09:23, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: >> Which Zope team is that? Would that be you? Having an overlay with >> updated packages certainly sounds good, but it would be nice to have >> some indication of what we're waiting for, or how long we're waiting. > > Arfrever, it would be nice if you could answer these questions. > > If there's no answer, we should just go ahead and last-rite the entire > category. > > BTW, what are the mechanics WRT removing an entire category? Should we > keep the category around for the benefit of overlays, or are there > mechanisms in place so that overlays can setup their own categories? Overlays can easily define their own categories if needed, so pruning the whole directory should not be a problem. Only profiles/categories might need to be adapted.
Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 09:23, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > Which Zope team is that? Would that be you? Having an overlay with > updated packages certainly sounds good, but it would be nice to have > some indication of what we're waiting for, or how long we're waiting. Arfrever, it would be nice if you could answer these questions. If there's no answer, we should just go ahead and last-rite the entire category. BTW, what are the mechanics WRT removing an entire category? Should we keep the category around for the benefit of overlays, or are there mechanisms in place so that overlays can setup their own categories? Cheers, Dirkjan
Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance
On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 00:50, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: > I suggest to wait until Zope team decides which overlay will be used to host > updated, improved > and actively maintained ebuilds. The comment in package.mask should describe > transition from > gentoo-x86 to overlay. Which Zope team is that? Would that be you? Having an overlay with updated packages certainly sounds good, but it would be nice to have some indication of what we're waiting for, or how long we're waiting. Cheers, Dirkjan
Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance
On Sun, 14 Aug 2011 00:50:40 +0200 Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: > 2011-08-13 12:37:00 Dirkjan Ochtman napisał(a): > > we should just cut it from the portage tree. > > I suggest to wait until Zope team decides which overlay will be used > to host updated, improved and actively maintained ebuilds. The > comment in package.mask should describe transition from gentoo-x86 to > overlay. Considering tupone's decision and radek's retirement, there's no Zope team anymore. I'll just mask it for removal in a reasonable amount of time and let it die in fire. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance
2011-08-13 12:37:00 Dirkjan Ochtman napisał(a): > we should just cut it from the portage tree. I suggest to wait until Zope team decides which overlay will be used to host updated, improved and actively maintained ebuilds. The comment in package.mask should describe transition from gentoo-x86 to overlay. -- Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > Hi there, > > > media-libs/FusionSound for whatever reason blocks net-zope/zodb > probably file collisions. IIRC i've been hit by that long time ago. There should be also a bug about it. > > Cheers, > > Dirkjan > > -- Fabio Erculiani
Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 12:37:00PM +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote: > And there are 3 open security bugs from 2011 with vulnerabilities in > Zope and/or Plone. > > So unless someone steps up to takes a serious whack at all of this > stuff, perhaps we should just cut it from the portage tree. Ugh :-(. Many years (5+) ago I was part of the Zope folk for a while. I think some of my old Zope deploys from then are still happily running with their new owners. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee & Infrastructure Lead E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85
[gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance
Hi there, I just completed removing the python herd from the metadata of about 70 packages in the net-zope category (all of these packages are still nominally maintained by the net-zope herd). This happened due to the fact that the majority of the python team isn't interested in maintaining Zope-related packages (there's 200+ of them in the net-zope category), and a different herd already exists that should in theory be able to take care of them. The net-zope herd nominally has two members: radek and tupone. From grepping changelogs, radek hasn't committed anything in net-zope since 2007. tupone committed one change in net-zope in 2010 and 4 in 2009. Instead, most of the recent work has been done by arfrever, who has recently been retired. Given this situation, I'm not sure it makes sense for us to keep all of those packages in the tree. Except for dependencies on zope-interface, which is pretty accepted and will keep being maintained by the python team in addition to the net-zope team, not much is depending on net-zope packages, either: app-admin/zprod-manager depends on net-zope/zope (hasn't been committed to since 2008) dev-python/rdflib has an optional dependency on net-zope/zodb, in addition to many other storage backends media-libs/FusionSound for whatever reason blocks net-zope/zodb (There are two packages in dev-python that depend on zope-testing, but those are actually only dependencies of net-zope packages again.) Zope maintenance is a lot of work and delays other stuff indefinitely: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=148333 (blockers for Python 2.5) https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=335248 (new Plone requires 80-100 new ebuilds) And there are 3 open security bugs from 2011 with vulnerabilities in Zope and/or Plone. So unless someone steps up to takes a serious whack at all of this stuff, perhaps we should just cut it from the portage tree. Cheers, Dirkjan
