Re: FreeBSD Ports conflicts checker
For one thing, skimming casually I see mostly kde related ports conflicting with other kde ones which I presume are false positives, removing them from list would make it appear more meaningful. -- View this message in context: http://freebsd.1045724.n5.nabble.com/FreeBSD-Ports-conflicts-checker-tp5715211p5715523.html Sent from the freebsd-ports mailing list archive at Nabble.com. ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD Ports conflicts checker
[ PLEASE don't top-post, ktnx ] On Tue, 05 Jun 2012 14:29:58 +0300 Sulev-Madis Silber wrote: > Well, I admit that this short summary was little too big. Bigger than > the another report that regularly ends up in ports@ > > Maybe big maintainer groups need different approach to this. And this > needs more refinement. I let things settle for a while and tell few > weeks later what is left. > > With more sanity and size checks, maybe. Refined form of conflicts. > This report already contains useful stuff but it's hard to spot > currently. Port "maintained" by ports@ are unmaintained so there's no "big maintainer group" here; IMO you should send this kind of botmails to ports@ from time to time (each 2-4 weeks), eventually with some by-hand comments in it if that's the case. Else no one will know / fix these ports. Based on my experience of running QAT for some years: - $people will complain about noise - $people will complain about the way the mail is formatted (yeh, of course I have a few suggestion about that :D ) (in 90% of the cases, $people above would do much better to ssh freefall.FreeBSD.org "tail -2 /etc/motd") - bugging people / lists on each run makes people ignore the issues My suggestion is to: - do a "mass mailing" (recap) each 6-8 weeks, - not send a mail on each run, except a commit was done to the respective ports since the lasts mail (in which case the problem should have been fixed) - avoid false-positives even if this way you risk missing some problems; 5% of false positives make people doubt the real 95% problems (generally speaking, getting right the last 5-10% is 90% of the work) - KEEP STATS. LOTS OF. if $port is broken for weeks and weeks, then we(portmgr@)'d like to know about it in order to find out what prevents it to be fixed and get it fixed. From a QA POV, I think your work is one of the best things that happened in the last years. THANK YOU for your work. (I'll be in touch in the next days). -- IOnut - Un^d^dregistered ;) FreeBSD "user" "Intellectual Property" is nowhere near as valuable as "Intellect" FreeBSD committer -> ite...@freebsd.org, PGP Key ID 057E9F8B493A297B ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD Ports conflicts checker
Well, I admit that this short summary was little too big. Bigger than the another report that regularly ends up in ports@ Maybe big maintainer groups need different approach to this. And this needs more refinement. I let things settle for a while and tell few weeks later what is left. With more sanity and size checks, maybe. Refined form of conflicts. This report already contains useful stuff but it's hard to spot currently. On 2012-06-05 13:35, Michael Scheidell wrote: > > > On 6/5/12 3:00 AM, Sulev-Madis 'ketas' Silber wrote: >> HTML version of this report is here: >> http://ketas.si.pri.ee/ports-conflicts/po...@freebsd.org >> >> For port accessibility/kdeaccessibility suggesting new CONFLICTS >> jovie-[0-9]* kdeartwork-[0-9]* kmag-[0-9]* kmousetool-[0-9]* kmouth-[0-9]* >> because of overlapping files bin/kmag (also used by accessibility/kmag) ... >> skipped 1396 other ones > you opened several pr's. > > dumping this into ports@ is less than helpful. > > -- > Michael Scheidell, CTO >>*| * SECNAP Network Security Corporation > d: +1.561.948.2259 > w: http://people.freebsd.org/~scheidell ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: FreeBSD Ports conflicts checker
On 6/5/12 3:00 AM, Sulev-Madis 'ketas' Silber wrote: HTML version of this report is here:http://ketas.si.pri.ee/ports-conflicts/po...@freebsd.org For port accessibility/kdeaccessibility suggesting new CONFLICTS jovie-[0-9]* kdeartwork-[0-9]* kmag-[0-9]* kmousetool-[0-9]* kmouth-[0-9]* because of overlapping files bin/kmag (also used by accessibility/kmag) ... skipped 1396 other ones you opened several pr's. dumping this into ports@ is less than helpful. -- Michael Scheidell, CTO >*| * SECNAP Network Security Corporation d: +1.561.948.2259 w: http://people.freebsd.org/~scheidell ___ freebsd-ports@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-ports To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-ports-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
