[gentoo-dev] Gentoo Council 2010/2011 - Nominations are now open
Hello fellow developers and users. Nominations for the Gentoo Council 2010/2011 are now open for the next two weeks (until 23:59 UTC, 18/06/2010). All nominations must be sent to the gentoo-dev mailing list. If you were nominated and want to run, you have to accept your nomination on the same mailing list. Here are the rules: * Council elections generally happen once a year * The council is composed of seven elected members * Nominations are allowed from June 5th 00H00 UTC to June 18th 23H59 UTC * Only Gentoo developers may be nominated * Anyone can nominate (nominating yourself is OK) * Nominees must accept their nomination before voting begins * Voting is opened from June 20th 00H00 UTC to July 03rd 23H59 UTC (there is a one day break between nominations and voting so the infra team has time to set up everything) * Only Gentoo developers that have joined the project before nomination starts may vote * Gentoo uses the Condorcet method of voting The page listing all nominations is here: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/elections/council/2010/council-201006-nominees.xml If you don't know what the Gentoo Council is, you can read about it here: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/ If you want to ask a question or share your thoughts, contact any of the election officials: Roy Bamford (neddyseagoon) Ulrich Müller (ulm) Torsten Veller (tove) Robin H. Johnson (robbat2) will be doing infra magic. You can send us an e-mail (elections at gentoo dot org) or find us on Freenode (#gentoo-elections, #gentoo-dev, so on). For the elections team, Torsten
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: changing the developer profile: FEATURES="test" -> FEATURES="test-fail-continue"
On Fri, 4 Jun 2010 18:48:38 +0200 Jeroen Roovers wrote: > [1] I've seen developers complain more and more about failing test > suites. Maybe that's a related issue? Developers now use the > FEATURES set out in a developer profile and can then extract some > kind of validity claim from the fact that I obviously didn't do my QA? > That would explain a lot. That came out wrong. s|from the fact|to the effect|
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: changing the developer profile: FEATURES="test" -> FEATURES="test-fail-continue"
On Fri, 04 Jun 2010 17:11:45 +0200 "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > What do you think about doing the following change in > /usr/portage/profiles/targets/developer/make.defaults: [..] > What do you think? I've never felt any need or obligation to use a developer profile. I don't think I ever saw any announcement to that effect either. What is the use of a developer profile?[1] Someone in the know, please sell it to me. :) Regards, jer [1] I've seen developers complain more and more about failing test suites. Maybe that's a related issue? Developers now use the FEATURES set out in a developer profile and can then extract some kind of validity claim from the fact that I obviously didn't do my QA? That would explain a lot.
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: changing the developer profile: FEATURES="test" -> FEATURES="test-fail-continue"
On 6/4/10 5:35 PM, Jesus Rivero (Neurogeek) wrote: > I've been thinking about this for a while. Some packages have tests > that are meant only for upstream in certain conditions > and are not meant to be ran during installing. I think that in extreme cases src_test should not call such tests. > As we have ARCH teams, > couldn't we think a way in which TEST teams can > be created? I mean, a bunch of devs only focused on making tests work > or just restrict them? I don't think that would be effective. Making the tests work is hard, especially for packages like gcc, or python. Having FEATURES="test" is intended to make developers catch these failures before checking in. However, with many packages failing tests, people started running FEATURES="-test" or just stopped (or never used) the developer profile. With FEATURES="test test-fail-continue" we should get best of both worlds: run tests always, but don't frustrate people by making build fail "in the middle of long emerge". Paweł signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: changing the developer profile: FEATURES="test" -> FEATURES="test-fail-continue"
Hi, On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 10:41 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > What do you think about doing the following change in > /usr/portage/profiles/targets/developer/make.defaults: > > replace "test" with "test-fail-continue" to make it just less > frustrating (we still have a lot of test failures) I've been thinking about this for a while. Some packages have tests that are meant only for upstream in certain conditions and are not meant to be ran during installing. As we have ARCH teams, couldn't we think a way in which TEST teams can be created? I mean, a bunch of devs only focused on making tests work or just restrict them? This team (or a Gentoo project) can work hand by hand with other teams and ARCH members. Is it even possible? > > Hopefully that will also make more of us use the developer profile, and > detect test failures. > > What do you think? > > Paweł Best regards, -- Jesus Rivero (Neurogeek)
[gentoo-dev] RFC: changing the developer profile: FEATURES="test" -> FEATURES="test-fail-continue"
What do you think about doing the following change in /usr/portage/profiles/targets/developer/make.defaults: replace "test" with "test-fail-continue" to make it just less frustrating (we still have a lot of test failures) Hopefully that will also make more of us use the developer profile, and detect test failures. What do you think? Paweł signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-dev] Lastrite: app-pda/malsync
# Samuli Suominen (04 Jun 2010) # # Doesn't compile with new versions of pilot-link, see the # package ChangeLog # # Masked for removal in 30 days app-pda/malsync
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [Gentoo Phoenix] an official Gentoo wiki
After all, we need to have further discussion on every single aspect so the previous meeting didn't decide anything at all The log is here [1] if anyone is interested in. [1]:http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang/files/meeting-1-log.txt On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 8:51 AM, Torsten Veller wrote: > * Tobias Scherbaum : > > Accidentally I noticed an initial project meeting which was announced > > via planet.g.o - but I wasn't able to attend that meeting, as i > > noticed it just a day or two before. > > The meeting was also announced on the wiki alias. Five days before the > meeting you should have got a mail. I think this is sufficient. > > -- > Regards Torsten > >
