Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Moving more developer data to LDAP, for scalability/redundancy (away, foward, permissive, SMTP password, plan) [WAS: Suggestion to ask devs to change their bugzilla name]
On 6/11/10 5:27 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> - Ability to split woodpecker/dev.g.o up, and have an EU dev machine,
> and a US dev machine. (If mail isn't being forwarded outside of our
> systems, you would put in ${userna...@eu.dev.gentoo.org.
Sounds good to me. Looks like it would have lower latency. :)
> Cons:
> - developers get changes to LDAP wrong already.
> = I counter that they ALSO change the wrong filenames and wonder why
> there is no effect. I counted a large number of '.permissave',
> '.devaway' and '.asmtppasswd' files.
Maybe we should have an easy way to compare how the system sees it
versus how the user sees it? For example some command/script that would say:
.away file: missing
(... similar checks for other files/things omitted here ...)
And then a person who has created a .devaway file can notice the
discrepancy.
> - complaints that LDAP is too hard to use.
Maybe we need better scripts and better documentation? I think the main
problem might be that LDAP is too alien for many people.
My opinion: I have no problem using Gentoo LDAP, but would appreciate
some usability improvements. :)
> - need to remember your LDAP password!
D'oh, I guess it's always required, for example to update the
description displayed on the roll call. By the way, it looks like this
is the reason why the description is sometimes outdated.
Paweł
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] LINGUAS handling
В Срд, 09/06/2010 в 21:21 +0200, Harald van Dijk пишет:
> On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 11:38:03AM +0400, Peter Volkov wrote:
> > 1. Do we want all packages to support LINGUAS if possible? It is
> > possible to leave gettext based package without LINGUAS and everything
> > will just work, but I think that it's good idea to make supported
> > languages visible to user through linguas_ flags.
>
> I agree, but I'd like to point out this would be a visible change in
> default behaviour: the default would change from "install everything" to
> "install nothing". For gettext-based packages, "install everything" is a
> sane default, in my opinion.
Yup, but 1) this change will be visible during emerge -pv since new
linguas value are visible there, 2) we already have gettext packages
with linguas supported.
> > 2. How should we handle case of unset LINGUAS in ebuild? Should we mimic
> > gettext and install all supported languages, using code like
> >
> > LINGUAS=${LINGUAS-%UNSET%}
> > if test "%UNSET%" == "$LINGUAS"; then
> > # install all supported languages
> > fi
>
> Firstly, don't use == with test.
Thank you for suggestions! Actually it was just an illustration loosely
taken from bug 148702.
> Unfortunately, consistency either way is bad. Making unset LINGUAS
> install nothing changes gettext's design, when the whole idea behind
> LINGUAS was to mimic gettext's design. Making unset LINGUAS install
> everything causes massive disk space requirements for the default
> settings for some packages such as openoffice. In my opinion, either of
> those would be worse than having LINGUAS behave inconsistently.
Ok.
> > 3. What is the purpose of strip-linguas function
>
> It's used for some packages that fail to build with certain LINGUAS
> values. If I recall correctly, binutils had a bug where putting en_GB in
> your LINGUAS made the build fail, for example. binutils doesn't support
> en_GB anyway, so it gets filtered out,
I see.
But what is preferred way for gettext packages? Define supported
languages in IUSE or use strip-linguas if required?
--
Peter.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-python/traits: traits-3.4.0.ebuild
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 11:45:14PM +0200, Rémi Cardona wrote: > Le 10/06/2010 22:45, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis a écrit : > > 2010-06-10 22:20:44 Nirbheek Chauhan napisał(a): > >> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 1:30 AM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis > >> wrote: > >>> 2010-06-10 21:27:40 Jeremy Olexa napisał(a): > I see no reason to *not* add a ChangeLog entry here. > >>> > >>> ChangeLog entries are not required for trivial changes. > >>> > >> > >> A "trivial" change is fixing a typo, or a manifest problem, a missing > >> quotation mark, etc. Anything else is not "trivial". > >> > >> Anything that changes how an ebuild functions, what it does, or the > >> installed files (and/or their contents) is NOT a trivial change. > > > > This commit only removed some compiler warnings. > > > > Why argue about this? Just always add a ChangeLog entry, like everyone > else. This is in everyone's interest, including yours. +1 besides, fixing dependencies or messing with cflags doesn't seem trivial to me =] -- Alex Alexander :: wired Gentoo Developer www.linuxized.com pgpPR8plFTSTJ.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion to ask devs to change their bugzilla name when becoming "devaway"
El vie, 11-06-2010 a las 00:38 +0200, Christian Ruppert escribió: > On 06/10/2010 07:07 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > Hello > > > > Currently, we only need to set a proper message in ~/.away (as talked in > > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/roll-call/devaway.xml ) when > > becoming "devaway". The problem is that a lot of our users don't know > > about that devaway list and, then, they will still open bug reports and > > complaint when their reports get stalled due maintainer not being > > available. > > > > My suggestion (until http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=256934 is > > solved) is to add a new step to "how to use the Devaway System" > > instructions asking people to also change their bugzilla name appending > > "(Devaway)", for example: > > > > "Pacho Ramos" would be changed to "Pacho Ramos (Deavaway)" > > > > Then, people could simply search "devaway" in google and would get > > proper information (gentoo devway page is the first shown) > > > > Thanks > > The devaway status/links are planned for bugzilla-3. > Great to know! Thanks :-) Are you ok with making bug 256934 "block" bug 213782 then? Best regards signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Moving more developer data to LDAP, for scalability/redundancy (away, foward, permissive, SMTP password, plan) [WAS: Suggestion to ask devs to change their bugzilla name]
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 10:43 PM, Theo Chatzimichos wrote: > On Friday 11 June 2010 06:27:26 Robin H. Johnson wrote: >> Related to integration of that, I would like opinions on moving some >> data from developer home directories into LDAP. I already placed the SPF >> data straight into LDAP, since I needed to be able to reach it from >> another machine anyway. >> > > +1, I strongly believe that LDAP is the answer > >> >> Cons: >> - complaints that LDAP is too hard to use. > > I don't agree with that, but just out of curiosity, is it possible to use a > web interface? phpldapadmin or something The problem with phpldapadmin is that it potentially opens up LDAP to the world. Right now you can only talk to ldap.gentoo.org from other gentoo machines due to what I believe are IPtables rules. Users use ssh keys to gain access to IPs in the trusted whitelist (eg dev.gentoo.org.) phpldapadmin means anyone on the internet can access our LDAP infrastructure if they find a vuln in it or steal a developers password and I assert that it is less likely for an ssh key to be stolen than a password (this does raise one point however. We don't enforce ssh key rotation; it might be nice to require devs to change keys every so often (annually?) Key rotation aside I think using using LDAP has two current problems. perl_ldap is feature-ful but hard to use. The bind options are confusing (user / recruiters / infra) do I bind as myself? As anon? Do I specify -b user or -b antarus? Mutli-valued attributes are confusing for users. No one remembers their ldap password (they save it in their email client if they use mail and never use it to login) so no one updates their ldap data. I'm not sure of a good solution to this myself. I know I never update my crap because I trouble remembering my password and don't want to bother robin with resetting it whenever I need to change something. It could be that by sourcing more data from LDAP we 'fix' this problem. -A > >> Bonus plans: >> - Maybe move mail aliases to LDAP? We'd lose comments :-(. Not if you added a comments field ;) > > +1 on that too > > -- > Theo Chatzimichos (tampakrap) > Gentoo KDE, Qt, SGML, Overlays, Planet Teams > blog.tampakrap.gr >
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Moving more developer data to LDAP, for scalability/redundancy (away, foward, permissive, SMTP password, plan) [WAS: Suggestion to ask devs to change their bugzilla name]
On Friday 11 June 2010 06:27:26 Robin H. Johnson wrote: > Related to integration of that, I would like opinions on moving some > data from developer home directories into LDAP. I already placed the SPF > data straight into LDAP, since I needed to be able to reach it from > another machine anyway. > +1, I strongly believe that LDAP is the answer > > Cons: > - complaints that LDAP is too hard to use. I don't agree with that, but just out of curiosity, is it possible to use a web interface? phpldapadmin or something > Bonus plans: > - Maybe move mail aliases to LDAP? We'd lose comments :-(. +1 on that too -- Theo Chatzimichos (tampakrap) Gentoo KDE, Qt, SGML, Overlays, Planet Teams blog.tampakrap.gr signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[gentoo-dev] RFC: Moving more developer data to LDAP, for scalability/redundancy (away, foward, permissive, SMTP password, plan) [WAS: Suggestion to ask devs to change their bugzilla name]
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 07:07:53PM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Currently, we only need to set a proper message in ~/.away (as talked in
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/roll-call/devaway.xml ) when
> becoming "devaway".
Related to integration of that, I would like opinions on moving some
data from developer home directories into LDAP. I already placed the SPF
data straight into LDAP, since I needed to be able to reach it from
another machine anyway.
All of them would be usable writable, and other access settings are
listed below:
- .away - world readable (gentooDevAway)
- .plan - world readable (gentooDevPlan)
- .asmtp - readable by mail system only. (gentooMailPasswd)
- .forward - readable by mail system only. (gentooMailForward or
mailRoutingAddress)
- .permissive - readable by mail system only (gentooMailPermissive)
The following is the count of how many devs have files in their homedirs
matching "\.(FOO).*":
- .asmtp (44 dev)
- .away (71 devs)
- .forward (218 devs)
- .permissive (10 devs)
- .plan (1 dev)
The mail stuff is important to the mail development plans in
Infrastructure. Specifically we want to move inbound SMTP _off_
dev.gentoo.org, and have multiple machines around the globe to handle
the load.
Pros:
- we gain tracked history of what these values are.
- They can be directly accessed from all infrastructure machines.
- Faster propagation of changes to .away and mail settings.
- Ability to split woodpecker/dev.g.o up, and have an EU dev machine,
and a US dev machine. (If mail isn't being forwarded outside of our
systems, you would put in ${userna...@eu.dev.gentoo.org.
Cons:
- developers get changes to LDAP wrong already.
= I counter that they ALSO change the wrong filenames and wonder why
there is no effect. I counted a large number of '.permissave',
'.devaway' and '.asmtppasswd' files.
- complaints that LDAP is too hard to use.
- need to remember your LDAP password!
- increased dependence on LDAP...
Bonus plans:
- Maybe move mail aliases to LDAP? We'd lose comments :-(.
--
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
pgpYvPx4fNXOl.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-python/traits: traits-3.4.0.ebuild
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 1:30 AM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: > 2010-06-10 21:27:40 Jeremy Olexa napisał(a): >> I see no reason to *not* add a ChangeLog entry here. > > ChangeLog entries are not required for trivial changes. > A "trivial" change is fixing a typo, or a manifest problem, a missing quotation mark, etc. Anything else is not "trivial". Anything that changes how an ebuild functions, what it does, or the installed files (and/or their contents) is NOT a trivial change. -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-python/traits: traits-3.4.0.ebuild
Le 10/06/2010 22:45, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis a écrit : > 2010-06-10 22:20:44 Nirbheek Chauhan napisał(a): >> On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 1:30 AM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis >> wrote: >>> 2010-06-10 21:27:40 Jeremy Olexa napisał(a): I see no reason to *not* add a ChangeLog entry here. >>> >>> ChangeLog entries are not required for trivial changes. >>> >> >> A "trivial" change is fixing a typo, or a manifest problem, a missing >> quotation mark, etc. Anything else is not "trivial". >> >> Anything that changes how an ebuild functions, what it does, or the >> installed files (and/or their contents) is NOT a trivial change. > > This commit only removed some compiler warnings. > Why argue about this? Just always add a ChangeLog entry, like everyone else. This is in everyone's interest, including yours. Cheers, Rémi
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-python/traits: traits-3.4.0.ebuild
2010-06-10 21:27:40 Jeremy Olexa napisał(a): > I see no reason to *not* add a ChangeLog entry here. ChangeLog entries are not required for trivial changes. -- Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-python/traits: traits-3.4.0.ebuild
2010-06-10 22:16:23 Fabian Groffen napisał(a): > On 10-06-2010 22:00:19 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: > > 2010-06-10 21:27:40 Jeremy Olexa napisał(a): > > > I see no reason to *not* add a ChangeLog entry here. > > > > ChangeLog entries are not required for trivial changes. > > Apart from whether or not this is true, do I understand well that you > consider masqueraded EAPI bumps as homepage updates as trivial changes > too? (traitsbackendwx) If a change in EAPI doesn't require any other changes in ebuild, then it's a trivial change. -- Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-python/traits: traits-3.4.0.ebuild
On 10-06-2010 22:00:19 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: > 2010-06-10 21:27:40 Jeremy Olexa napisał(a): > > I see no reason to *not* add a ChangeLog entry here. > > ChangeLog entries are not required for trivial changes. Apart from whether or not this is true, do I understand well that you consider masqueraded EAPI bumps as homepage updates as trivial changes too? (traitsbackendwx) -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-python/traits: traits-3.4.0.ebuild
2010-06-10 22:20:44 Nirbheek Chauhan napisał(a): > On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 1:30 AM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis > wrote: > > 2010-06-10 21:27:40 Jeremy Olexa napisał(a): > >> I see no reason to *not* add a ChangeLog entry here. > > > > ChangeLog entries are not required for trivial changes. > > > > A "trivial" change is fixing a typo, or a manifest problem, a missing > quotation mark, etc. Anything else is not "trivial". > > Anything that changes how an ebuild functions, what it does, or the > installed files (and/or their contents) is NOT a trivial change. This commit only removed some compiler warnings. -- Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-python/traits: traits-3.4.0.ebuild
On Fri, Jun 11, 2010 at 1:55 AM, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: > 2010-06-10 22:16:23 Fabian Groffen napisał(a): >> On 10-06-2010 22:00:19 +0200, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis wrote: >> > 2010-06-10 21:27:40 Jeremy Olexa napisał(a): >> > > I see no reason to *not* add a ChangeLog entry here. >> > >> > ChangeLog entries are not required for trivial changes. >> >> Apart from whether or not this is true, do I understand well that you >> consider masqueraded EAPI bumps as homepage updates as trivial changes >> too? (traitsbackendwx) > > If a change in EAPI doesn't require any other changes in ebuild, then it's a > trivial change. > Your definitions of trivial are getting more and more convenient with each commit. -- ~Nirbheek Chauhan Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team
Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion to ask devs to change their bugzilla name when becoming "devaway"
On 06/10/2010 07:07 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > Hello > > Currently, we only need to set a proper message in ~/.away (as talked in > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/roll-call/devaway.xml ) when > becoming "devaway". The problem is that a lot of our users don't know > about that devaway list and, then, they will still open bug reports and > complaint when their reports get stalled due maintainer not being > available. > > My suggestion (until http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=256934 is > solved) is to add a new step to "how to use the Devaway System" > instructions asking people to also change their bugzilla name appending > "(Devaway)", for example: > > "Pacho Ramos" would be changed to "Pacho Ramos (Deavaway)" > > Then, people could simply search "devaway" in google and would get > proper information (gentoo devway page is the first shown) > > Thanks The devaway status/links are planned for bugzilla-3. -- Regards, Christian Ruppert Gentoo Linux Developer and Bugzilla Admin Fingerprint: 9B50 01DF E873 A0E4 126D 6C16 8B17 B68E 7FAE 7D38
[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-python/traits: traits-3.4.0.ebuild
On Thu, 10 Jun 2010 19:19:33 + (UTC), "Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis (arfrever)" wrote: > arfrever10/06/10 19:19:33 > > Modified: traits-3.4.0.ebuild > Log: > Fix dependencies. Use -fno-strict-aliasing. > (Portage version: HEAD/cvs/Linux x86_64) > > Revision ChangesPath > 1.3 dev-python/traits/traits-3.4.0.ebuild I see no reason to *not* add a ChangeLog entry here. Please, consider the fact that some people don't want to go digging in cvs log to see who added -fno-strict-aliasing or why. (as an example. I, personally, don't care about -fno-strict-aliasing) -Jeremy
Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion to ask devs to change their bugzilla name when becoming "devaway"
El jue, 10-06-2010 a las 12:23 -0600, Joe Peterson escribió: > I think a better solution, if we need to indicate this, is to have > bugzilla grab the status from devaway and display it next to the dev's > name in bug reports. Changing the user's name seems a bit cumbersome, > and I don't agree that people will know what "devaway" means - i.e. > they may not even google it. > > -Joe > It's what bug 256934 is about but, until it's solved... :-/ signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: [gentoo-dev] Suggestion to ask devs to change their bugzilla name when becoming "devaway"
I think a better solution, if we need to indicate this, is to have bugzilla grab the status from devaway and display it next to the dev's name in bug reports. Changing the user's name seems a bit cumbersome, and I don't agree that people will know what "devaway" means - i.e. they may not even google it. -Joe 2010/6/10 Pacho Ramos : > Hello > > Currently, we only need to set a proper message in ~/.away (as talked in > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/roll-call/devaway.xml ) when > becoming "devaway". The problem is that a lot of our users don't know > about that devaway list and, then, they will still open bug reports and > complaint when their reports get stalled due maintainer not being > available. > > My suggestion (until http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=256934 is > solved) is to add a new step to "how to use the Devaway System" > instructions asking people to also change their bugzilla name appending > "(Devaway)", for example: > > "Pacho Ramos" would be changed to "Pacho Ramos (Deavaway)" > > Then, people could simply search "devaway" in google and would get > proper information (gentoo devway page is the first shown) > > Thanks >
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: changing the developer profile: FEATURES="test" -> FEATURES="test-fail-continue"
On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 07:36:51PM +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote: > On 06/10/2010 07:28 PM, Brian Harring wrote: > > On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 07:08:44PM +0200, "Paweee Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > >> On 6/4/10 5:11 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > >>> What do you think about doing the following change in > >>> /usr/portage/profiles/targets/developer/make.defaults: > >> > >> The following change has now landed in CVS: > > > > I'd suggest a dev-announce in the future on that one w/ some lead > > time... dev profile is admittedly 'dev', but changes that can induce > > an hour build taking a day due to tests being ran is usually good to > > give a heads up on. > > > > Aside from that, change makes sense. > > ~harring > > > > not really, since FEATURES="test" was already there... > > http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/profiles/targets/developer/make.defaults?r1=1.3&r2=1.4 Nard, good catch. Nevermind ;) ~harring pgpNc8szjoWcV.pgp Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Suggestion to ask devs to change their bugzilla name when becoming "devaway"
Hello Currently, we only need to set a proper message in ~/.away (as talked in http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/roll-call/devaway.xml ) when becoming "devaway". The problem is that a lot of our users don't know about that devaway list and, then, they will still open bug reports and complaint when their reports get stalled due maintainer not being available. My suggestion (until http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=256934 is solved) is to add a new step to "how to use the Devaway System" instructions asking people to also change their bugzilla name appending "(Devaway)", for example: "Pacho Ramos" would be changed to "Pacho Ramos (Deavaway)" Then, people could simply search "devaway" in google and would get proper information (gentoo devway page is the first shown) Thanks signature.asc Description: Esta parte del mensaje está firmada digitalmente
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: changing the developer profile: FEATURES="test" -> FEATURES="test-fail-continue"
On 06/10/2010 07:28 PM, Brian Harring wrote: > On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 07:08:44PM +0200, "Paweee Hajdan, Jr." wrote: >> On 6/4/10 5:11 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: >>> What do you think about doing the following change in >>> /usr/portage/profiles/targets/developer/make.defaults: >> >> The following change has now landed in CVS: > > I'd suggest a dev-announce in the future on that one w/ some lead > time... dev profile is admittedly 'dev', but changes that can induce > an hour build taking a day due to tests being ran is usually good to > give a heads up on. > > Aside from that, change makes sense. > ~harring > not really, since FEATURES="test" was already there... http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/profiles/targets/developer/make.defaults?r1=1.3&r2=1.4
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: changing the developer profile: FEATURES="test" -> FEATURES="test-fail-continue"
On Wed, Jun 09, 2010 at 07:08:44PM +0200, "Paweee Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > On 6/4/10 5:11 PM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > > What do you think about doing the following change in > > /usr/portage/profiles/targets/developer/make.defaults: > > The following change has now landed in CVS: I'd suggest a dev-announce in the future on that one w/ some lead time... dev profile is admittedly 'dev', but changes that can induce an hour build taking a day due to tests being ran is usually good to give a heads up on. Aside from that, change makes sense. ~harring pgpOiV1OQc5Rf.pgp Description: PGP signature
