On Monday 12 June 2006 16:58, Stephen Bennett wrote:
I am also aware that this falls roughly under what the Council was
asked to discuss in its June meeting, but since that seems to have not
happened, I'm bringing it up anyway, since I would like to get
something done here.
we meet Jun 15th
On Monday 12 June 2006 17:15, Brian Harring wrote:
B) council
outcome tomorrow (no point in changing it till they've weighed in on
the whole enchilada).
not really
it makes people dropping in their own stuff easier and doesnt adversely affect
the portage tree in any way
-mike
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 05:13:48PM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Wed, 2006-06-14 at 15:54 +0200, Harald van Dijk wrote:
On Wed, Jun 14, 2006 at 09:13:34AM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
A great example of this are web-based applications. The web-apps
project
does not own all
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:31:41 -0400
Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group
packages and maintaining developers?
We could be boring and change herd to packagegroup.
We could require that a herd mail alias be maintained for
On Thursday 15 June 2006 02:33, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
We could require that a herd mail alias be maintained for every herd,
with the same name as the herd, such that the herd alias lists the
maintainers of all packages in the herd.
this would be useful regardless
-mike
pgpNaJsppizDH.pgp
Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] posted
[EMAIL PROTECTED], excerpted below, on Wed, 14
Jun 2006 16:11:26 -0400:
I responded to this sentence:
Interested in
figuring out what use flags were turned off? Check out
/usr/portage/profiles/base/use.defaults and other use.defaults files
that correspond to your
On Monday 12 June 2006 19:00, Stephen Bennett wrote:
My current idea is to draw up a formal specification
huge wang
this would simplify greatly the work required for people to develop a package
manager compatible with Gentoo ebuilds
-mike
pgpW85vGl5vYU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Friday 09 June 2006 15:01, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Everyone that you happen to include as allowed to actually commit, you
mean. As opposed to everyone that can sign themselves up for
bugzilla?
It is designed to be more open and more easily fixable.
Sure.
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Friday 09 June 2006 15:01, Stefan Schweizer wrote:
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Everyone that you happen to include as allowed to actually commit, you
mean. As opposed to everyone that can sign themselves up for
bugzilla?
It is designed to be more open and more
On Tuesday 13 June 2006 16:17, Peter wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:17:10 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Care to elaborate? The wise, all-knowing Zen argument isn't |
particularly helpful
It's perfect proof that there are users that are utterly clueless about
what is best for
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 04:29:44 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Tuesday 13 June 2006 16:17, Peter wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jun 2006 20:17:10 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| Care to elaborate? The wise, all-knowing Zen argument isn't |
particularly helpful
It's perfect proof that there are
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 15 June 2006 02:33, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
We could require that a herd mail alias be maintained for every herd,
with the same name as the herd, such that the herd alias lists the
maintainers of all packages in the herd.
this would be useful regardless
While talking about herds etc...
Please, stick your addy into the relevant eclass if you are actually a
maintainer or at least a person to contact about the given eclass.
Examples of eclasses that just let me clueless and digging in the logs
when a bug/problem arrives:
cvs.eclass - ???
On Thursday 15 June 2006 12:26, Jakub Moc wrote:
gems.eclass - ruby, are you taking bugs for this? pythonhead's been MIA
for ages, not much useful as a maintainer contact
I'll try to learn how it works and see to take this over for ruby herd.
--
Diego Flameeyes Pettenò -
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 11:57:21 +0200
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 15 June 2006 02:33, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
We could require that a herd mail alias be maintained for every
herd, with the same name as the herd, such that the herd alias
lists the
Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
I don't know if this is a really unpopular viewpoint, but for a lot of stuff
I
maintain I put myself as maintainer and the herd I am acting as part of in
herd. My intention there is to say primarily I am taking care of this and
have taken responsibility but if I
Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
- same name as herd requirement doesn't work for stuff like
cron/mysql/postgresql/apache... i.e., system accounts.
Herd aliases could be named herd-name, perhaps.
Current practice for these aliases is herd-bugs in most of the cases.
Examples - apache-bugs, php-bugs,
On 6/15/06, Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group
packages and maintaining developers?
Herds are fine ... just seems to be some differing ideas about how
they are managed. That's inevitable, given our collective reluctance
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 12:34:42PM +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
:=) If a general consent is (games left apart ;) that herd is a backup
for cases when maintainer is unavailable/goes MIA, and a primary
maintainer if there's no maintainer tag in metadata.xml, let's just
leave it at that, be done with
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 12:48:30 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
While talking about herds etc...
Please, stick your addy into the relevant eclass if you are actually a
maintainer or at least a person to contact about the given eclass.
Examples of eclasses that just let me clueless and digging in
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 12:26:01 +0200
Jakub Moc [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
versionator.eclass - anyone to take over after ciaranm?
I can most likely take care of this one. Should be low enough
maintenance anyway since for the most part it Just Works.
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On 15/06/06, Kevin F. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:31:41 -0400Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group packages and maintaining developers?
We could be boring and change herd to packagegroup.--Kevin F.
On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 02:59 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 15 June 2006 02:33, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
We could require that a herd mail alias be maintained for every herd,
with the same name as the herd, such that the herd alias lists the
maintainers of all packages in the herd.
On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 12:34 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
Marcus D. Hanwell wrote:
I don't know if this is a really unpopular viewpoint, but for a lot of
stuff I
maintain I put myself as maintainer and the herd I am acting as part of in
herd. My intention there is to say primarily I am
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:31:41 -0400 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group
| packages and maintaining developers?
Herds the way they operate in practice are fine. The issue is the old
metastructure definition, which a)
On 6/14/06, Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/metastructure/herds/#doc_chap4
Specifically the listing for the herd tag.
Just because people are doing things *wrong* doesn't mean that there
isn't a defined manner in which things should be done.
From the
On Thursday 15 June 2006 06:26, Jakub Moc wrote:
cvs.eclass - ???
i'll take over while the main guy is out
eutils.eclass - ???
it depends highly on the function, but generally base-system
flag-o-matic.eclass - ???
base-system / hardened
gnuconfig.eclass - ???
this is dead as it's been
On Thursday 15 June 2006 09:04, George Prowse wrote:
On 15/06/06, Kevin F. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:31:41 -0400 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group
packages and maintaining developers?
On Thursday 15 June 2006 16:50, Mike Frysinger wrote:
this is dead as it's been integrated into portage
Can gnuconfig_update calls go away from new ebuilds, then?
--
Diego Flameeyes Pettenò - http://farragut.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org/
Gentoo/Alt lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE
четвер, 15. червень 2006 12:26, Jakub Moc Ви написали:
Please, stick your addy into the relevant eclass if you are actually a
maintainer or at least a person to contact about the given eclass.
May be its a time for some kind of metadata for eclasses?
(No, that's just an idea, not a proposal of a
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
*sigh*
Indeed...
No. You've gone and changed the practices we have in place now to make
it more complicated.
No, I didn't. If games herd wants any game dumped onto games herd, then
do it. Most other people probably don't want unknown stuff dumped on them.
Say it
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 10:58:44 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 15 June 2006 05:39, Peter wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 04:29:44 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
being able to download patchsets from the internet, touchup a few
lines so they apply without rejects, and releasing the result to
Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 15 June 2006 09:04, George Prowse wrote:
On 15/06/06, Kevin F. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:31:41 -0400 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group
packages and
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:07:36 +0100
Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 6/14/06, Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/metastructure/herds/#doc_chap4
Specifically the listing for the herd tag.
Just because people are doing things *wrong* doesn't
On Thursday 15 June 2006 00:31, Alec Warner wrote:
So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group
packages and maintaining developers?
As Mike says:
they work just fine for me
--
Sandro (sanchan)
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
Can gnuconfig_update calls go away from new ebuilds, then?
Yes, because base/make.defaults includes FEATURES=autoconfig and no
profile turns it off.
Daniel
--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
On Thursday 15 June 2006 14:56, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 00:31:41 -0400 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| So apparently they suck, anyone have a new shiny idea on how to group
| packages and maintaining developers?
Herds the way they operate in practice are fine. The
Hi Kevin,
On 6/15/06, Kevin F. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I read the should as
implying that all new packages must have it, and packages existing
before the introduction of metadata should get it as and when
maintainer gets around to it (i.e. at least on the next bump).
Chris's argument
On Thursday 15 June 2006 11:21, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Thursday 15 June 2006 16:50, Mike Frysinger wrote:
this is dead as it's been integrated into portage
Can gnuconfig_update calls go away from new ebuilds, then?
yes, i'll update the func to complain about being deprecated
On Thursday 15 June 2006 14:10, Daniel Drake wrote:
Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
Can gnuconfig_update calls go away from new ebuilds, then?
Yes, because base/make.defaults includes FEATURES=autoconfig and no
profile turns it off.
actually, portage doesnt even respect that anymore ... it
On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 19:18 +0100, Stuart Herbert wrote:
Hi Kevin,
On 6/15/06, Kevin F. Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I read the should as
implying that all new packages must have it, and packages existing
before the introduction of metadata should get it as and when
maintainer gets
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 17:43 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
Say it with me.
Herd == packages
Team == people
There's no such thing like team in metadata.xml, that's what we've
been talking about for ~1 day now.
Maybe it's what you erroneously have been trying to say that
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 02:32:36PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 15 June 2006 11:21, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Thursday 15 June 2006 16:50, Mike Frysinger wrote:
this is dead as it's been integrated into portage
Can gnuconfig_update calls go away from new ebuilds,
On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 20:43 +0200, Jakub Moc wrote:
And again, what's this distinction good for? Well, it's useless unless
you are trying to enforce something like what you've suggested here
before, i.e.
quote
I see nothing wrong with listing perl as the herd, *only* if
they have
Shyam Mani wrote:
Hi everyone,
Please take a moment to welcome our latest addition to the Forums gang,
Roy Bamford aka NeddySeagoon.
Thanks for volunteering your time Roy, we will all benefit from your
extensive knowledge and your patience with n00bs.
--Curtis
signature.asc
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:22:31 -0400
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would much
rather see something like sunrise (but not necessarily sunrise
itself) used to put packages which are no longer maintained, but were
once in the tree.
sunset.overlays.g.o :)
--
Kevin F. Quinn
On Thursday 15 June 2006 14:48, Harald van Dijk wrote:
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 02:32:36PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 15 June 2006 11:21, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Thursday 15 June 2006 16:50, Mike Frysinger wrote:
this is dead as it's been integrated into portage
On Thursday 08 June 2006 15:34, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Actually, this isn't exactly true. In the case of a compile fix, such
as this, the developer is aware of the issue, and gcc-porting@ is on the
bug, too, as CC, usually. If someone from gcc-porting were to go around
committing patches to
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 04:25:10PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 15 June 2006 14:48, Harald van Dijk wrote:
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 02:32:36PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On Thursday 15 June 2006 11:21, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
On Thursday 15 June 2006 16:50, Mike
On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 22:01 +0200, Kevin F. Quinn wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006 15:22:31 -0400
Chris Gianelloni [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would much
rather see something like sunrise (but not necessarily sunrise
itself) used to put packages which are no longer maintained, but were
once
On Thu, 2006-06-15 at 22:36 +0200, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
On Thursday 08 June 2006 15:34, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
Actually, this isn't exactly true. In the case of a compile fix, such
as this, the developer is aware of the issue, and gcc-porting@ is on the
bug, too, as CC, usually. If
On Thursday 15 June 2006 22:39, Harald van Dijk wrote:
The question was explicitly about new ebuilds, so your answer concerning
only new ebuilds is the reasonable assumption without an indication
otherwise.
I limited to new for backward compat... but as portage updates them anyway
now, I'll
On Thursday 15 June 2006 16:39, Harald van Dijk wrote:
The question was explicitly about new ebuilds
it was ... when i first read the question though i missed the new portion
-mike
pgp7yhdPvFdIb.pgp
Description: PGP signature
On Thursday 15 June 2006 21:36, Mike Kelly wrote:
As part of my original plans for my GLEP27 implementation, I was
going to have my scripts automatically add the users requested by a
package (for example, the cron user), to all the passwd backends
listsed in /etc/nsswitch.conf.
nss is
On Thu, Jun 15, 2006 at 11:03:36PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
However, in consultation with some
folks, it seems that what may be more desirable is to just add
users/groups to the local files/compat backends instead, and not make
any changes to the remote databases.
you mean update
55 matches
Mail list logo
