Re: [MacPorts] #52144: mariadb: support for mpkg / mdmg
> On Sep 5, 2016, at 4:09 PM, Bradley Giesbrecht wrote: > >> On Sep 5, 2016, at 8:03 AM, Lawrence Velázquez wrote: >> >>> On Sep 5, 2016, at 8:42 AM, Craig Treleaven wrote: >>> >>> Not to belabour the issue, but should it not be the impact to port users >>> that determines whether a change is “minor” or not? >> >> I believe the "minorness" of the change is wholly up to the maintainer. >> >>> The number of lines, by itself, doesn’t necessarily determine that impact. >>> For example, a 1 or 2 line change in one of the database ports might make a >>> new database engine the default. >> >> It is certainly true that a small change with great impact is not minor, but >> a large change with little impact is also not minor. As an extreme example, >> I would not appreciate a commit to one of my ports that had no impact on the >> installation yet completely rearranged the portfile. I'd have to waste time >> reading and understanding the committer's code, looking for edge cases and >> failure modes, reworking local commits that no longer apply, etc. >> >> (This situation can already happen via timeout, but in that case there is a >> clear, objective policy that maintainers implicitly agree to when they take >> up maintainership.) >> >> My rule of thumb is that fixing typos and broken builds is almost always >> okay under openmaintainer. Many maintainers also permit minor version bumps >> and bug fixes, but some don't. In all cases, it's safest to wait out the 72 >> hours. > > I was going to add to the ticket but maybe this is a better place to discuss > for now. > > I have attempted to keep the mysql ports similar to make maintaining them > easier. > > I have a few questions regarding these changes. > > 1. Will "port load mariadb-server" work? Good point, I don’t know. I’ll try it. BTW, this afternoon I noticed that I’m not respecting the “startupitem.install” setting. I’ll change the patch so if the user has modified macports.conf with ‘startupitem.install no’, we don’t put anything in /Library/LaunchDaemons. > 2. Has this been tested on older systems? Not yet. It has been a lot of time and work to get this far. What is the earliest OS that you test with the server ports? The new version of my MythTV ports are not going to support anything before 10.9! The best I can do is 10.6 on X86_64. > 3. Can the pkg run concurrently with the port? I assume pkg installs into > $prefix, am I right? Correct, the pkg installs in the same prefix it was built in. For development, I build mpkgs on my main system (10.10) and test installation on a VM (10.11). (Later, I’ll build the mpkg for distribution on a VM with a non-default prefix.) > 4. Is there any reason the same changes would not work for the mysql*-server, > mariadb*-server and persona-server ports? I know almost nothing about percona but I think it ought to work with the different versions of mysql and mariadb. The launchd plist was introduced in MySQL 5.7.8. Craig ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
Re: [MacPorts] #52144: mariadb: support for mpkg / mdmg
> On Sep 5, 2016, at 8:03 AM, Lawrence Velázquez wrote: > >> On Sep 5, 2016, at 8:42 AM, Craig Treleaven wrote: >> >> Not to belabour the issue, but should it not be the impact to port users >> that determines whether a change is “minor” or not? > > I believe the "minorness" of the change is wholly up to the maintainer. > >> The number of lines, by itself, doesn’t necessarily determine that impact. >> For example, a 1 or 2 line change in one of the database ports might make a >> new database engine the default. > > It is certainly true that a small change with great impact is not minor, but > a large change with little impact is also not minor. As an extreme example, I > would not appreciate a commit to one of my ports that had no impact on the > installation yet completely rearranged the portfile. I'd have to waste time > reading and understanding the committer's code, looking for edge cases and > failure modes, reworking local commits that no longer apply, etc. > > (This situation can already happen via timeout, but in that case there is a > clear, objective policy that maintainers implicitly agree to when they take > up maintainership.) > > My rule of thumb is that fixing typos and broken builds is almost always okay > under openmaintainer. Many maintainers also permit minor version bumps and > bug fixes, but some don't. In all cases, it's safest to wait out the 72 hours. I was going to add to the ticket but maybe this is a better place to discuss for now. I have attempted to keep the mysql ports similar to make maintaining them easier. I have a few questions regarding these changes. 1. Will "port load mariadb-server" work? 2. Has this been tested on older systems? 3. Can the pkg run concurrently with the port? I assume pkg installs into $prefix, am I right? 4. Is there any reason the same changes would not work for the mysql*-server, mariadb*-server and persona-server ports? Regards, Bradley Giesbrecht (pixilla) ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
Re: [MacPorts] #52144: mariadb: support for mpkg / mdmg
> On Sep 5, 2016, at 8:42 AM, Craig Treleaven wrote: > > Not to belabour the issue, but should it not be the impact to port users that > determines whether a change is “minor” or not? I believe the "minorness" of the change is wholly up to the maintainer. > The number of lines, by itself, doesn’t necessarily determine that impact. > For example, a 1 or 2 line change in one of the database ports might make a > new database engine the default. It is certainly true that a small change with great impact is not minor, but a large change with little impact is also not minor. As an extreme example, I would not appreciate a commit to one of my ports that had no impact on the installation yet completely rearranged the portfile. I'd have to waste time reading and understanding the committer's code, looking for edge cases and failure modes, reworking local commits that no longer apply, etc. (This situation can already happen via timeout, but in that case there is a clear, objective policy that maintainers implicitly agree to when they take up maintainership.) My rule of thumb is that fixing typos and broken builds is almost always okay under openmaintainer. Many maintainers also permit minor version bumps and bug fixes, but some don't. In all cases, it's safest to wait out the 72 hours. vq ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
Re: [MacPorts] #52144: mariadb: support for mpkg / mdmg
> On Sep 4, 2016, at 8:54 PM, Lawrence Velázquez wrote: > >> On Sep 4, 2016, at 8:32 PM, MacPorts wrote: >> >> #52144: mariadb: support for mpkg / mdmg >> -+--- >> Reporter: ctreleaven@…| Owner: pixilla@… >> Type: enhancement | Status: new >> Priority: Normal | Milestone: >> Component: ports |Version: >> Resolution: | Keywords: >> Port: mariadb-server | >> -+--- >> >> Comment (by ctreleaven@…): >> >> [snip] >> >> Barring objections, I plan commit these changes under openmaintainer in >> the next few days. I feel the startupitem to launchd plist changes are >> relatively low risk. I'll try to handle anything that might crop up. > > This is the MacPorts Guide’s description[*] of the openmaintainer policy: > > If a port's maintainer contains the address > , this means that the author > allows minor updates to the port without contacting him first. > But permission should still be sought for major changes. > > While limited in scope, your changes are anything but minor (the patch > is 181 lines!), and committing them would clearly violate the spirit of > the openmaintainer guideline. > > You’d be better off invoking the 72-hour maintainer timeout policy. > > [*] > https://guide.macports.org/chunked/project.update-policies.html#project.update-policies.nonmaintainer > You’re right, I should have referenced maintainer timeout. I tried to contact Bradley a week ago today with no response. Not to belabour the issue, but should it not be the impact to port users that determines whether a change is “minor” or not? The number of lines, by itself, doesn’t necessarily determine that impact. For example, a 1 or 2 line change in one of the database ports might make a new database engine the default. That would be much more signficant that what I’ve proposed. At the heart of it, the proposed changes are: 1) Use an upstream launchd plist. 2) Enable packaging where it has never worked before. Nonetheless, whether this is “maintainer timeout” or “openmaintainer”, I don’t want to create problems with the port. I welcome any and all feedback. Craig ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
Re: [MacPorts] #52144: mariadb: support for mpkg / mdmg
> On Sep 4, 2016, at 8:32 PM, MacPorts wrote: > > #52144: mariadb: support for mpkg / mdmg > -+--- > Reporter: ctreleaven@…| Owner: pixilla@… > Type: enhancement | Status: new > Priority: Normal | Milestone: > Component: ports |Version: > Resolution: | Keywords: > Port: mariadb-server | > -+--- > > Comment (by ctreleaven@…): > > [snip] > > Barring objections, I plan commit these changes under openmaintainer in > the next few days. I feel the startupitem to launchd plist changes are > relatively low risk. I'll try to handle anything that might crop up. This is the MacPorts Guide’s description[*] of the openmaintainer policy: If a port's maintainer contains the address , this means that the author allows minor updates to the port without contacting him first. But permission should still be sought for major changes. While limited in scope, your changes are anything but minor (the patch is 181 lines!), and committing them would clearly violate the spirit of the openmaintainer guideline. You’d be better off invoking the 72-hour maintainer timeout policy. [*] https://guide.macports.org/chunked/project.update-policies.html#project.update-policies.nonmaintainer vq ___ macports-dev mailing list macports-dev@lists.macosforge.org https://lists.macosforge.org/mailman/listinfo/macports-dev
