Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
On 13 August 2014 02:46, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: Dnia 2014-08-11, o godz. 20:48:20 William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org napisał(a): got a minor (but chatty) QA warning: DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character Why is this a QA warning in the first place? Because it is a common mistake, and having the warning in-place should help people avoid repeating it. This is correct. I don't recall a policy mandating that descriptions can't end with '.'. I asked our QA lead about it and was told that he didn't recall that we have an official policy about it either. Also, the devmanual never mentions any such requirement. I don't know if and where it is documented but that's what I was taught when I started contributing to Gentoo, and it pretty much follows the common sense. DESCRIPTION is supposed to be short and descriptive. So you do an elliptical sentence (if I got the right translation), and that doesn't end with a dot. Again, this is what I was taught as well. It may have been an undocumented rule, but it has been around for as long as I can remember. It also makes linguistic sense, and as an English teacher it always irks me when I see this mistake. If you have any fair reason to not follow this, please speak of it. Otherwise, this is pure bikeshed and waste of time. This thread already took much more time than fixing your packages if repoman complained about them. Amen! If someone can point me to something I'm missing, let me know. Otherwise, I think the warning should be removed. Even if there were no written-down policy, why would it be removed? What is the benefit of removing the check that resulted in many fixes already? Do you want to revert the removals afterwards? Or do you want to introduce new packages which use '.' there? I completely support this argument. The warning is correct and should remain in place. -- Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
On Mon, 11 Aug 2014 20:48:20 -0500 William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 03:22:11PM +0300, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: Hello World! TL;DR: This evening I plan to mangle ~3000 ebuilds in the main tree by dropping trailing '.' in all 'DESCRIPTION=' fields (except etc. case) Long story: As you may know newest portage release 2.2.11 got a minor (but chatty) QA warning: DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character Why is this a QA warning in the first place? It isn't or shouldn't be; in the future, it would be nice if this type passes by QA / Council before being acked into the Portage tree code. Looking at the commit, the ack / commit has completely bypassed QA; we also were not involved on the related bug, thus we were unaware of it. I don't recall a policy mandating that descriptions can't end with '.'. I asked our QA lead about it and was told that he didn't recall that we have an official policy about it either. Also, the devmanual never mentions any such requirement. It has been a common belief to drop '.' among some from what I've seen. -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
William Hubbs:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 03:59:30AM +0200, Manuel Rüger wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
*snip*
These links might be helpful:
http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=06637c4215d55c57517739214c6e0fd6f8f53914
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=438976
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/80786
What's still missing is a patch for devmanual (if we still really want
to enforce this).
I read the thread, and there was no concensus about making this a
repoman check. Some people thought it was a good idea, but there was a
feeling that this sort of thing is trivial and shouldn't be worried
about.
That thread is pretty odd.
First, a sentence does not need to have a predicate. I know that for 99%
sure in german and the english wikipedia article seems to suggest the
same. Correct me if I am wrong.
Second, there are valid descriptions that are full ordinary sentences
without referencing ${PN}:
Access a working SSH implementation by means of a library.
In addition, repoman doesn't check for full sentences that reference
${PN}, such as:
Portage is the package management and distribution system for Gentoo.
So we have another (useless) repoman warning with false positives.
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 8:47 AM, hasufell hasuf...@gentoo.org wrote:
First, a sentence does not need to have a predicate. I know that for 99%
sure in german and the english wikipedia article seems to suggest the
same. Correct me if I am wrong.
In English your typical English class would teach that every sentence
must have a predicate. From what Google tells me it technically isn't
entirely true, but every sentence generally does contain a verb. So,
library that implements SSL is not a sentence under any
circumstances.
Second, there are valid descriptions that are full ordinary sentences
without referencing ${PN}:
Access a working SSH implementation by means of a library.
In addition, repoman doesn't check for full sentences that reference
${PN}, such as:
Portage is the package management and distribution system for Gentoo.
So we have another (useless) repoman warning with false positives.
Yeah, at best this seems a bit trivial. Do we have a policy that
descriptions aren't allowed to be complete sentences? Many of our
developers are not native English speakers in the first place, so
striving for grammatical perfection is a bit optimistic. On top of
that, repoman certainly isn't a native English speaker, so expecting
it to achieve grammatical perfection is a really tall order. And
please don't suggest making languagetool a dependency for portage...
I don't have a problem with QA recommending new tree policies, but if
they're going to do this the QA team ought to first ensure that the
team agrees (however they want to govern that), and then communicate
the policy before implementing it. I'd also implement it in
documentation before doing so in repoman, otherwise we're going to
have a repoman full of 800 rules whose origin is a mystery. I'm fine
with QA policies going into effect by default, but communicating them
allows objections to be raised and an appeal made to Council if
necessary before we get too far along. This isn't just about due
process - it is hard for developers to even comply with a policy they
are unaware of.
Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 12/08/14 08:47 AM, hasufell wrote:
William Hubbs:
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 03:59:30AM +0200, Manuel Rüger wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512
*snip*
These links might be helpful:
http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=06637c4215d55c57517739214c6e0fd6f8f53914
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=438976
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/80786
What's still missing is a patch for devmanual (if we still
really want to enforce this).
I read the thread, and there was no concensus about making this
a repoman check. Some people thought it was a good idea, but
there was a feeling that this sort of thing is trivial and
shouldn't be worried about.
That thread is pretty odd.
First, a sentence does not need to have a predicate. I know that
for 99% sure in german and the english wikipedia article seems to
suggest the same. Correct me if I am wrong.
Second, there are valid descriptions that are full ordinary
sentences without referencing ${PN}: Access a working SSH
implementation by means of a library.
In addition, repoman doesn't check for full sentences that
reference ${PN}, such as: Portage is the package management and
distribution system for Gentoo.
So we have another (useless) repoman warning with false positives.
TL;DR -- is there any technical reason as to why a DESCRIPTION ending
in '.' is bad? Other than the fact that it adds 3000 unnecessary
bytes to the portage tree? IE, does it have the possibility of
throwing off tools that strictly adhere to some random spec (although
it doesn't seem like PMS declares anything bad about this either)??
Perhaps we need to have a less-important repoman warning level
(something that can be quieted with a flag) for things like this? In
terms of DESCRIPTION consistency I don't see it being a bad thing that
we have the warning, but i also don't see a point in changing the
entire tree to get rid of 3000 bytes, esp. since the ChangeLog entries
added to the tree will add at least 30,000 bytes :)
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
iF4EAREIAAYFAlPqHIYACgkQ2ugaI38ACPCvXQD7BQYtciffNZDCM03vMSlNAgQh
s4j3dw3tL9VDe/oiq7kA/25lVdaRqAc/mbdiI5surUOG9a0J+1sk/nrVft4ocnSs
=8273
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
Rich Freeman: so striving for grammatical perfection is a bit optimistic. In that case, we should just rm the repoman warning and stop discussing this matter.
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 09:26:07AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: *snip* Yeah, at best this seems a bit trivial. Do we have a policy that descriptions aren't allowed to be complete sentences? Many of our developers are not native English speakers in the first place, so striving for grammatical perfection is a bit optimistic. On top of that, repoman certainly isn't a native English speaker, so expecting it to achieve grammatical perfection is a really tall order. And please don't suggest making languagetool a dependency for portage... No, we do not have, and there has been no request for, a qa policy that requires description to not end with a '.'. Also, it is not documented in the devmanual. So, it appears that this warning was put in place without involving the QA team at all. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
Dnia 2014-08-11, o godz. 22:34:06 Bertrand Jacquin be...@meleeweb.net napisał(a): Hi, On 2014-08-10 14:22, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: The script does not handle case of multiline description: DESCRIPTION=You have to clean that yourself. You could handle this by reading metadata/md5-cache/*/* instead of ebuild itself But is multiline DESCRIPTION something recommended as it should contain a short description ? Considering that we have length limit on DESCRIPTION that is shorter than typical line wrapping position, I don't think that we need to consider multiline DESCRIPTIONs. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 8/12/2014 9:26 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: [snip] I don't have a problem with QA recommending new tree policies, but if they're going to do this the QA team ought to first ensure that the team agrees (however they want to govern that), and then communicate the policy before implementing it. I'd also implement it in documentation before doing so in repoman, otherwise we're going to have a repoman full of 800 rules whose origin is a mystery. I'm fine with QA policies going into effect by default, but communicating them allows objections to be raised and an appeal made to Council if necessary before we get too far along. This isn't just about due process - it is hard for developers to even comply with a policy they are unaware of. Rich This isn't a QA policy, was not run by us as far as I can tell, and I don't know where it came from or why it was added. +1 for revert, if people want to run this by Council or QA later and actually get an official decision we can talk about putting it back, but for now it's generating a lot of noise for no real benefit. It's useless checks like this that make people ignore repoman warnings. Chris Reffett QA Team Lead -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32) iEYEARECAAYFAlPqXvAACgkQ23laikJhg1QvTQCffjAZYIzBGBRlp1l/y6iydzTQ 3d0An12lbTbzr7nWe37qtoay7ktWUAs6 =6c3E -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
Dnia 2014-08-11, o godz. 20:48:20 William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org napisał(a): On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 03:22:11PM +0300, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: Hello World! TL;DR: This evening I plan to mangle ~3000 ebuilds in the main tree by dropping trailing '.' in all 'DESCRIPTION=' fields (except etc. case) Long story: As you may know newest portage release 2.2.11 got a minor (but chatty) QA warning: DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character Why is this a QA warning in the first place? Because it is a common mistake, and having the warning in-place should help people avoid repeating it. I don't recall a policy mandating that descriptions can't end with '.'. I asked our QA lead about it and was told that he didn't recall that we have an official policy about it either. Also, the devmanual never mentions any such requirement. I don't know if and where it is documented but that's what I was taught when I started contributing to Gentoo, and it pretty much follows the common sense. DESCRIPTION is supposed to be short and descriptive. So you do an elliptical sentence (if I got the right translation), and that doesn't end with a dot. If you have any fair reason to not follow this, please speak of it. Otherwise, this is pure bikeshed and waste of time. This thread already took much more time than fixing your packages if repoman complained about them. If someone can point me to something I'm missing, let me know. Otherwise, I think the warning should be removed. Even if there were no written-down policy, why would it be removed? What is the benefit of removing the check that resulted in many fixes already? Do you want to revert the removals afterwards? Or do you want to introduce new packages which use '.' there? -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
Chris Reffett: if people want to run this by Council I'll laugh my ass off if this thing makes it on the council agenda xD
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 Friends, the repoman patch is reverted. And that is the end of this. I do not have gx86 access, so if someone wants me to revert 3K commits there, I'll need a proxy... - -- Alexander berna...@gentoo.org https://secure.plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2 Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iF4EAREIAAYFAlPqjnIACgkQRtClrXBQc7W8NwD8CuFNEf7Bwn28Nej6hU2rx+eh Ms0J17N1k4kj4uEGb4YA/jPWqlOzm9kf0AvR6rQXZzusNmpAsFOTokrO8A98Kza9 =2zAm -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
Hello World! TL;DR: This evening I plan to mangle ~3000 ebuilds in the main tree by dropping trailing '.' in all 'DESCRIPTION=' fields (except etc. case) Long story: As you may know newest portage release 2.2.11 got a minor (but chatty) QA warning: DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character https://github.com/gentoo/portage/commit/06637c4215d55c57517739214c6e0fd6f8f53914 https://bugs.gentoo.org/438976 About ~3000 ebuilds are affected, thus I've sketched a mangling script: https://github.com/trofi/gentoo-qa/blob/master/check_description.sh It is nice to use to convert all your large overlays you sync to gx86, etc. The script does not handle case of multiline description: DESCRIPTION=You have to clean that yourself. I'll mangle/commit one package at a time. Hope not to interfere with your workflow much. If you have any objections/thoughts please do say so. Thanks! -- Sergei signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
Hi, On 2014-08-10 14:22, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: The script does not handle case of multiline description: DESCRIPTION=You have to clean that yourself. You could handle this by reading metadata/md5-cache/*/* instead of ebuild itself But is multiline DESCRIPTION something recommended as it should contain a short description ? -- Beber
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 03:22:11PM +0300, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: Hello World! TL;DR: This evening I plan to mangle ~3000 ebuilds in the main tree by dropping trailing '.' in all 'DESCRIPTION=' fields (except etc. case) Long story: As you may know newest portage release 2.2.11 got a minor (but chatty) QA warning: DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character Why is this a QA warning in the first place? I don't recall a policy mandating that descriptions can't end with '.'. I asked our QA lead about it and was told that he didn't recall that we have an official policy about it either. Also, the devmanual never mentions any such requirement. If someone can point me to something I'm missing, let me know. Otherwise, I think the warning should be removed. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 08/12/2014 03:48 AM, William Hubbs wrote: On Sun, Aug 10, 2014 at 03:22:11PM +0300, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: Hello World! TL;DR: This evening I plan to mangle ~3000 ebuilds in the main tree by dropping trailing '.' in all 'DESCRIPTION=' fields (except etc. case) Long story: As you may know newest portage release 2.2.11 got a minor (but chatty) QA warning: DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character Why is this a QA warning in the first place? I don't recall a policy mandating that descriptions can't end with '.'. I asked our QA lead about it and was told that he didn't recall that we have an official policy about it either. Also, the devmanual never mentions any such requirement. If someone can point me to something I'm missing, let me know. Otherwise, I think the warning should be removed. William These links might be helpful: http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=06637c4215d55c57517739214c6e0fd6f8f53914 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=438976 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/80786 What's still missing is a patch for devmanual (if we still really want to enforce this). Manuel -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJT6XUCXxSAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ4MDA1RERERkM0ODM2QkE4MEY3NzY0N0M1 OEZCQTM2QzhEOUQ2MzVDAAoJEFj7o2yNnWNcJ8kP/RPn7b+TO/KJef2qdkuDQ7r9 6A86HEylCFMoKDJKk8jV4ne+Ns/zDydiD+JNWidOfdNpiVHbs9FA+WYW+mLzo4dB MvcsQ03afPC320z817RAYjPJAg+SRI+RmTy+0d9v65wuwjowNY+uOReCAvjEBiCu Qe5yEmMzhrGDud+xV7RveNsByXhSmZuDxFM+qsDc/+T2iBf+oX1x7jKSd9rMQP5d A/Q6dB3/54QQxkAkawFMuyYl/FX2WvE/QSDqJD8S8R7KWM2nEGNP9S7F83F6RZJd yPrV3GpVwrY/A7K995MHCkdM1/lSg2h0+48Q/P4frJCvE5yfAkYYmo0THx/7/DNA XVpcrq1/31wgmYATa1qacF6NHSwWqt0+JMQTn4HDw8WajIkdiMbJ4x9VIbFcvRT2 GcbsE2zPYEeybK7OdslA9V6Am8M0rDWby+r1S+QKwTvWXJDRQndUmrNTD5riLU8R RG+vhLm+U+u2tSn9Cy/jhl+H3mgVkZ1Fmk4Gnw4Nvob1Vxxc8bWzzppDCu2gZWVS paz97341YghYUdx3rknU8cat8J+sYeEx26b4s5Dvj9o9WOpQBIRMfzBQ3/nV8hK9 imlgNCHMaBYvwKM0/yn+7Jm/+JU+STmhexL0dBkja1LgfbGWcNRQeuXh881cU1WN Am75VVTGrpU9FPN8IqIc =bmFg -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 03:59:30AM +0200, Manuel Rüger wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 *snip* These links might be helpful: http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=06637c4215d55c57517739214c6e0fd6f8f53914 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=438976 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/80786 What's still missing is a patch for devmanual (if we still really want to enforce this). I read the thread, and there was no concensus about making this a repoman check. Some people thought it was a good idea, but there was a feeling that this sort of thing is trivial and shouldn't be worried about. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] gentoo-x86 tree cleanup for 'DESCRIPTION ends with a '.' character' warnings
how to i get off these mailing lists? On Mon, Aug 11, 2014 at 7:42 PM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: On Tue, Aug 12, 2014 at 03:59:30AM +0200, Manuel Rüger wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 *snip* These links might be helpful: http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=06637c4215d55c57517739214c6e0fd6f8f53914 https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=438976 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/80786 What's still missing is a patch for devmanual (if we still really want to enforce this). I read the thread, and there was no concensus about making this a repoman check. Some people thought it was a good idea, but there was a feeling that this sort of thing is trivial and shouldn't be worried about. William -- Tyler Pohl
