Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] gentoolkit.git repository reorganized

[Mike Gilbert]

On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 1:39 AM, Michał Górny  wrote:
> On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 21:06:33 -0700
> Brian Dolbec  wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 17:37:26 -0400
>> Mike Frysinger  wrote:
>>
>> > On 22 Oct 2015 12:54, Paul Varner wrote:
>> > > Mike, I know you're busy with other stuff, but if you ever want to
>> > > see a new gentoolkit/gentoolkit-dev release, consider this your
>> > > authorization to just do it.  The README.dev files state how to
>> > > make releases.
>> >
>> > thanks, i think this will help a lot
>> >
>> > > Since, the tools have dwindled down in gentoolkit-dev, I do think it
>> > > does make sense to keep it in the same repo and merge the packages
>> > > together behind a USE flag.  I will revert the commit, that emptied
>> > > the genttolkit-dev branch and ask mgorny to nuke the new
>> > > gentoolkit-dev repository.
>> > >
>> > > As I get time, I will work towards moving the gentoolkit-dev tools
>> > > into gentoolkit and putting them behind a USE flag in the ebuild.
>> >
>> > i'm no distutils expert, and every time i try to do something "fancy",
>> > i get frustrated by the module :).  do people know of examples where
>> > you can do optional installs with a flag ?  a cookbook sort of entry
>> > here would help and i could take care of merging in say ekeyword.
>> > -mike
>>
>> Have a look at layman's setup.py.  It parses IUSE to set the installed
>> files via setup.py.  It may not be the best method, but it does work.
>>
>> The layman ebuild sets deps acording to the ISUE flags and setup.py
>> sets the installed modules on the python side.
>
> Sorry, what?! That's a huge QA violation. There is *NO* guarantee that
> USE will be exported. In fact, it is only exported because of poor
> design inside Portage that could result in the variable getting lost
> otherwise.

PMS says that USE will be exported to the environment. So, this should
not break with any PMS-compliant package manager.

Personally, it makes me cringe, but I suppose it doesn't make a lot of
sense to invent an entirely new envvar for it.

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] gentoolkit.git repository reorganized

[Brian Dolbec]

On Fri, 6 Nov 2015 18:35:54 -0500
Mike Gilbert  wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 30, 2015 at 1:39 AM, Michał Górny 
> wrote:
> > On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 21:06:33 -0700
> > Brian Dolbec  wrote:
> >  
> >> On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 17:37:26 -0400
> >> Mike Frysinger  wrote:
> >>  
> >> > On 22 Oct 2015 12:54, Paul Varner wrote:  
> >> > > Mike, I know you're busy with other stuff, but if you ever
> >> > > want to see a new gentoolkit/gentoolkit-dev release, consider
> >> > > this your authorization to just do it.  The README.dev files
> >> > > state how to make releases.  
> >> >
> >> > thanks, i think this will help a lot
> >> >  
> >> > > Since, the tools have dwindled down in gentoolkit-dev, I do
> >> > > think it does make sense to keep it in the same repo and merge
> >> > > the packages together behind a USE flag.  I will revert the
> >> > > commit, that emptied the genttolkit-dev branch and ask mgorny
> >> > > to nuke the new gentoolkit-dev repository.
> >> > >
> >> > > As I get time, I will work towards moving the gentoolkit-dev
> >> > > tools into gentoolkit and putting them behind a USE flag in
> >> > > the ebuild.  
> >> >
> >> > i'm no distutils expert, and every time i try to do something
> >> > "fancy", i get frustrated by the module :).  do people know of
> >> > examples where you can do optional installs with a flag ?  a
> >> > cookbook sort of entry here would help and i could take care of
> >> > merging in say ekeyword. -mike  
> >>
> >> Have a look at layman's setup.py.  It parses IUSE to set the
> >> installed files via setup.py.  It may not be the best method, but
> >> it does work.
> >>
> >> The layman ebuild sets deps acording to the ISUE flags and setup.py
> >> sets the installed modules on the python side.  
> >
> > Sorry, what?! That's a huge QA violation. There is *NO* guarantee
> > that USE will be exported. In fact, it is only exported because of
> > poor design inside Portage that could result in the variable
> > getting lost otherwise.  
> 
> PMS says that USE will be exported to the environment. So, this should
> not break with any PMS-compliant package manager.
> 
> Personally, it makes me cringe, but I suppose it doesn't make a lot of
> sense to invent an entirely new envvar for it.
> 

I remember discussing this with you at the time.  setup.py is capable
of taking args for this, but the distutils eclass and or distutils
itself was not capable of doing that from an ebuild.  So, this was my
only option at the time.  If that has changed, it'll be news to me :)


Make it capable to pass options like automake and I'll be glad to change
it.
 

-- 
Brian Dolbec 

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] gentoolkit.git repository reorganized

[Mike Frysinger]

On 22 Oct 2015 12:54, Paul Varner wrote:
> Mike, I know you're busy with other stuff, but if you ever want to see a
> new gentoolkit/gentoolkit-dev release, consider this your authorization
> to just do it.  The README.dev files state how to make releases.

thanks, i think this will help a lot

> Since, the tools have dwindled down in gentoolkit-dev, I do think it
> does make sense to keep it in the same repo and merge the packages
> together behind a USE flag.  I will revert the commit, that emptied the
> genttolkit-dev branch and ask mgorny to nuke the new gentoolkit-dev
> repository.
> 
> As I get time, I will work towards moving the gentoolkit-dev tools into
> gentoolkit and putting them behind a USE flag in the ebuild.

i'm no distutils expert, and every time i try to do something "fancy",
i get frustrated by the module :).  do people know of examples where
you can do optional installs with a flag ?  a cookbook sort of entry
here would help and i could take care of merging in say ekeyword.
-mike


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] gentoolkit.git repository reorganized

[Michał Górny]

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 21:06:33 -0700
Brian Dolbec  wrote:

> On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 17:37:26 -0400
> Mike Frysinger  wrote:
> 
> > On 22 Oct 2015 12:54, Paul Varner wrote:  
> > > Mike, I know you're busy with other stuff, but if you ever want to
> > > see a new gentoolkit/gentoolkit-dev release, consider this your
> > > authorization to just do it.  The README.dev files state how to
> > > make releases.  
> > 
> > thanks, i think this will help a lot
> >   
> > > Since, the tools have dwindled down in gentoolkit-dev, I do think it
> > > does make sense to keep it in the same repo and merge the packages
> > > together behind a USE flag.  I will revert the commit, that emptied
> > > the genttolkit-dev branch and ask mgorny to nuke the new
> > > gentoolkit-dev repository.
> > > 
> > > As I get time, I will work towards moving the gentoolkit-dev tools
> > > into gentoolkit and putting them behind a USE flag in the ebuild.  
> > 
> > i'm no distutils expert, and every time i try to do something "fancy",
> > i get frustrated by the module :).  do people know of examples where
> > you can do optional installs with a flag ?  a cookbook sort of entry
> > here would help and i could take care of merging in say ekeyword.
> > -mike  
> 
> Have a look at layman's setup.py.  It parses IUSE to set the installed
> files via setup.py.  It may not be the best method, but it does work.
> 
> The layman ebuild sets deps acording to the ISUE flags and setup.py
> sets the installed modules on the python side.

Sorry, what?! That's a huge QA violation. There is *NO* guarantee that
USE will be exported. In fact, it is only exported because of poor
design inside Portage that could result in the variable getting lost
otherwise.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny



pgpE6AaN9BPow.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] gentoolkit.git repository reorganized

[Brian Dolbec]

On Thu, 29 Oct 2015 17:37:26 -0400
Mike Frysinger  wrote:

> On 22 Oct 2015 12:54, Paul Varner wrote:
> > Mike, I know you're busy with other stuff, but if you ever want to
> > see a new gentoolkit/gentoolkit-dev release, consider this your
> > authorization to just do it.  The README.dev files state how to
> > make releases.
> 
> thanks, i think this will help a lot
> 
> > Since, the tools have dwindled down in gentoolkit-dev, I do think it
> > does make sense to keep it in the same repo and merge the packages
> > together behind a USE flag.  I will revert the commit, that emptied
> > the genttolkit-dev branch and ask mgorny to nuke the new
> > gentoolkit-dev repository.
> > 
> > As I get time, I will work towards moving the gentoolkit-dev tools
> > into gentoolkit and putting them behind a USE flag in the ebuild.
> 
> i'm no distutils expert, and every time i try to do something "fancy",
> i get frustrated by the module :).  do people know of examples where
> you can do optional installs with a flag ?  a cookbook sort of entry
> here would help and i could take care of merging in say ekeyword.
> -mike

Have a look at layman's setup.py.  It parses IUSE to set the installed
files via setup.py.  It may not be the best method, but it does work.

The layman ebuild sets deps acording to the ISUE flags and setup.py
sets the installed modules on the python side.

-- 
Brian Dolbec 

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] gentoolkit.git repository reorganized

[Paul Varner]

On 10/21/2015 11:48 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 22 Oct 2015 00:45, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On 21 Oct 2015 16:35, Paul Varner wrote:
>>> On 10/20/2015 03:34 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
 On 15/10/15 19:42, Paul Varner wrote:
> Over the last couple of days, I have done the following:
> 1. Migrated the gentoolkit-dev branch to its own gentoolkit-dev.git
> repository
> 2. Moved the gentoolkit branch to master on the
> gentoolkit.git repository
 Why did you not just make gentoolkit master, and leave gentoolkit-dev as
 a branch? That's certainly the common way of using git.

>>> Mainly, because at this point gentoolkit and gentoolkit-dev are now
>>> almost completely separate code bases as well as being separate packages.
>>>
>>> They share a common ancestry and that can be seen looking through the
>>> commit log, but starting with gentoolkit-0.2.5, gentoolkit started
>>> migrating to python as the only scripting language and utilizing the
>>> Portage API with setuptools as the build system. The two remaining bash
>>> scripts are being rewritten in python and when that is complete, they
>>> will be completely separate code bases.
>>>
>>> gentoolkit-dev has stayed as a collection of stand-alone scripts written
>>> in multiple languages intended mainly for Gentoo developers.
>>>
>>> Since they really do not share any code anymore, it did not make sense
>>> to me keeping gentoolkit-dev as a branch and it should be in its own
>>> repository.
>> echangelog is the only non-shell/python script, and arguably not useful
>> anymore.  repoman itself has a changelog option, and since the move to
>> git, we don't commit ChangeLog entries anymore.  i would just punt it.
>>
>> there's also eviewcvs written in perl, but that's also dead now that
>> we use git, so it should be punted.
>>
>> that really only leaves three:
>>  - ebump - bash
>>  - ekeyword - python
>>  - imlate - python
>>
>> why not merge them into a single repo ?  you can have a dev/ subdir
>> for scripts that are more developer oriented and put them behind a
>> USE=dev flag.
> another reason i think there should be one: gentoolkit-dev rarely sees
> releases, nor is it clear who is supposed to be making them, nor does
> it seem like a good use of time to have independent builds/packages.
> since gentoolkit is getting rolled, updates could finally go out.
>
> case in point: ekeyword was rewritten almost 2 years ago and it still
> hasn't seen a release.
> -mike

Thanks for the feedback, this is one reason why I've kept the branch and
have not deleted it yet.  As far as releases for gentoolkit-dev, idl0r
was managing it, but as you have observed that has not been happening. 

Mike, I know you're busy with other stuff, but if you ever want to see a
new gentoolkit/gentoolkit-dev release, consider this your authorization
to just do it.  The README.dev files state how to make releases.

Since, the tools have dwindled down in gentoolkit-dev, I do think it
does make sense to keep it in the same repo and merge the packages
together behind a USE flag.  I will revert the commit, that emptied the
genttolkit-dev branch and ask mgorny to nuke the new gentoolkit-dev
repository.

As I get time, I will work towards moving the gentoolkit-dev tools into
gentoolkit and putting them behind a USE flag in the ebuild.

Regards,
Paul

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] gentoolkit.git repository reorganized

[Mike Frysinger]

On 22 Oct 2015 00:45, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 21 Oct 2015 16:35, Paul Varner wrote:
> > On 10/20/2015 03:34 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> > > On 15/10/15 19:42, Paul Varner wrote:
> > > > Over the last couple of days, I have done the following:
> > >
> > > > 1. Migrated the gentoolkit-dev branch to its own gentoolkit-dev.git
> > > > repository
> > > > 2. Moved the gentoolkit branch to master on the
> > > > gentoolkit.git repository
> > > Why did you not just make gentoolkit master, and leave gentoolkit-dev as
> > > a branch? That's certainly the common way of using git.
> > >
> > 
> > Mainly, because at this point gentoolkit and gentoolkit-dev are now
> > almost completely separate code bases as well as being separate packages.
> > 
> > They share a common ancestry and that can be seen looking through the
> > commit log, but starting with gentoolkit-0.2.5, gentoolkit started
> > migrating to python as the only scripting language and utilizing the
> > Portage API with setuptools as the build system. The two remaining bash
> > scripts are being rewritten in python and when that is complete, they
> > will be completely separate code bases.
> > 
> > gentoolkit-dev has stayed as a collection of stand-alone scripts written
> > in multiple languages intended mainly for Gentoo developers.
> > 
> > Since they really do not share any code anymore, it did not make sense
> > to me keeping gentoolkit-dev as a branch and it should be in its own
> > repository.
> 
> echangelog is the only non-shell/python script, and arguably not useful
> anymore.  repoman itself has a changelog option, and since the move to
> git, we don't commit ChangeLog entries anymore.  i would just punt it.
> 
> there's also eviewcvs written in perl, but that's also dead now that
> we use git, so it should be punted.
> 
> that really only leaves three:
>  - ebump - bash
>  - ekeyword - python
>  - imlate - python
> 
> why not merge them into a single repo ?  you can have a dev/ subdir
> for scripts that are more developer oriented and put them behind a
> USE=dev flag.

another reason i think there should be one: gentoolkit-dev rarely sees
releases, nor is it clear who is supposed to be making them, nor does
it seem like a good use of time to have independent builds/packages.
since gentoolkit is getting rolled, updates could finally go out.

case in point: ekeyword was rewritten almost 2 years ago and it still
hasn't seen a release.
-mike


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] gentoolkit.git repository reorganized

[Mike Frysinger]

On 21 Oct 2015 16:35, Paul Varner wrote:
> On 10/20/2015 03:34 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> > On 15/10/15 19:42, Paul Varner wrote:
> > > Over the last couple of days, I have done the following:
> >
> > > 1. Migrated the gentoolkit-dev branch to its own gentoolkit-dev.git
> > > repository
> > > 2. Moved the gentoolkit branch to master on the
> > > gentoolkit.git repository
> > Why did you not just make gentoolkit master, and leave gentoolkit-dev as
> > a branch? That's certainly the common way of using git.
> >
> 
> Mainly, because at this point gentoolkit and gentoolkit-dev are now
> almost completely separate code bases as well as being separate packages.
> 
> They share a common ancestry and that can be seen looking through the
> commit log, but starting with gentoolkit-0.2.5, gentoolkit started
> migrating to python as the only scripting language and utilizing the
> Portage API with setuptools as the build system. The two remaining bash
> scripts are being rewritten in python and when that is complete, they
> will be completely separate code bases.
> 
> gentoolkit-dev has stayed as a collection of stand-alone scripts written
> in multiple languages intended mainly for Gentoo developers.
> 
> Since they really do not share any code anymore, it did not make sense
> to me keeping gentoolkit-dev as a branch and it should be in its own
> repository.

echangelog is the only non-shell/python script, and arguably not useful
anymore.  repoman itself has a changelog option, and since the move to
git, we don't commit ChangeLog entries anymore.  i would just punt it.

there's also eviewcvs written in perl, but that's also dead now that
we use git, so it should be punted.

that really only leaves three:
 - ebump - bash
 - ekeyword - python
 - imlate - python

why not merge them into a single repo ?  you can have a dev/ subdir
for scripts that are more developer oriented and put them behind a
USE=dev flag.
-mike


signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] gentoolkit.git repository reorganized

[Alexander Berntsen]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 15/10/15 19:42, Paul Varner wrote:
> Over the last couple of days, I have done the following:
> 
> 1. Migrated the gentoolkit-dev branch to its own gentoolkit-dev.git 
> repository
> 2. Moved the gentoolkit branch to master on the 
> gentoolkit.git repository
Why did you not just make gentoolkit master, and leave gentoolkit-dev as
a branch? That's certainly the common way of using git.

- -- 
Alexander
berna...@gentoo.org
https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
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=UAOL
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

[gentoo-portage-dev] gentoolkit.git repository reorganized

[Paul Varner]

All:

Due to historical reasons the gentoolkit git repository was organized
with two branches, gentoolkit and gentoolkit-dev with master effectively
being an empty branch.  This was confusing to contributers and with git
did not make a lot of sense.  Over the last couple of days, I have done
the following:

1. Migrated the gentoolkit-dev branch to its own gentoolkit-dev.git
repository
2. Moved the gentoolkit branch to master on the gentoolkit.git repository

The one thing left to do is to remove the gentoolkit-dev branch from the
gentoolkit repository, I'm going to wait for several days to make sure
that there is nothing missing in the gentoolkit-dev repo before removing it.

Due to the nature of the changes to the repos, I've found that it is
easiest to backup the current clone and re-clone the repository to make
sure that everything is up to date with the changes.

Regards,
Paul