-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
# Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org (12 May 2013)
# Does not build. Dead upstream. Bug #467286
# Removal in 30 days
dev-python/gdl-python
- --
Regards,
Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer
http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang
-BEGIN PGP
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Good day,
The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2]. Please update your
local trees using the following command:
Developers: git remote set-url origin
g...@github.com:gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org
Read-only: git remote set-url origin
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2].
No objections to mirroring it there, and accepting pull requests
there. However, would an outright move be contrary to our social
contract?:
However, Gentoo will
On Sun, 12 May 2013, Markos Chandras wrote:
The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2]. Please update your
local trees using the following command:
Developers: git remote set-url origin
g...@github.com:gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org
Read-only: git remote set-url origin
Rich Freeman wrote:
The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2].
The only thing that isn't FOSS is github itself. Not sure if
others feel strongly about it.
I feel strongly against github.
Making something like github the primary point of contact
communicates many negative things
On 12 May 2013 21:27, Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Rich Freeman wrote:
The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2].
The only thing that isn't FOSS is github itself. Not sure if
others feel strongly about it.
I feel strongly against github.
Making something like github the
Rich Freeman posted on Sun, 12 May 2013 09:12:03 -0400 as excerpted:
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 7:32 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org
wrote:
The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2].
No objections to mirroring it there, and accepting pull requests there.
However, would an
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 05/12/2013 02:15 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Sun, 12 May 2013, Markos Chandras wrote:
The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2]. Please update
your local trees using the following command:
Developers: git remote set-url origin
On 12/05/2013 14:27, Peter Stuge wrote:
I feel strongly against github.
Making something like github the primary point of contact
communicates many negative things for Gentoo IMO.
Oh heavens, for once I agree with Peter.
--
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flamee...@flameeyes.eu —
On 05/12/2013 09:15 AM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Sun, 12 May 2013, Markos Chandras wrote:
The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2]. Please update your
local trees using the following command:
Developers: git remote set-url origin
g...@github.com:gentoo/devmanual.gentoo.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 05/12/2013 04:02 PM, Ben de Groot wrote:
On 12 May 2013 21:27, Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Rich Freeman wrote:
The devmanual git repository[1] moved to github[2].
The only thing that isn't FOSS is github itself. Not sure if
others
Markos Chandras wrote:
The repository is still accessible in http://git.overlays.gentoo.org
and read-only access is still available. However, the write access
removed because of potential conflicts between g.o.g.o and github.
If you can guarantee me that people will not mess things up and not
# Ian Delaney idel...@gentoo.org (12 May 2013)
# Recommended by upstream's own maintainer to drop the
# package, no longer valid.
# Masked for removal in 30 days
dev-python/etsdevtools
# Ian Delaney idel...@gentoo.org (12 May 2013)
# Recommended by upstream's own maintainer to drop the
#
On Sunday 12 of May 2013 23:21:15 IAN DELANEY wrote:
# Ian Delaney idel...@gentoo.org (12 May 2013)
# Recommended by upstream's own maintainer to drop the
# package, no longer valid.
# Masked for removal in 30 days
dev-python/etsdevtools
# Ian Delaney idel...@gentoo.org (12 May 2013)
#
On Sun, 12 May 2013, Richard Yao wrote:
Last time I looked, github's server software wasn't open source.
Why should we use non-free tools for a central piece of Gentoo
documentation?
The last that I looked, the Verilog designs and other hardware
schematics were not open source either, but
On Sun, 12 May 2013, Markos Chandras wrote:
Earlier you said: Just to clarify, i never said I wanted to
deprecated the git.overlays.gentoo.org repo.
Have I missed something? Last time I looked, github's server
software wasn't open source. Why should we use non-free tools for a
central
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 05/12/2013 04:48 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
On Sun, 12 May 2013, Markos Chandras wrote:
Earlier you said: Just to clarify, i never said I wanted to
deprecated the git.overlays.gentoo.org repo.
Have I missed something? Last time I looked,
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 11:48 AM, Ulrich Mueller u...@gentoo.org wrote:
However, the write access removed because of potential conflicts
between g.o.g.o and github. If you can guarantee me that people will
not mess things up and not commit only to one of the to remotes,
then we can enable
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 11:54 AM, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
This is the kind of policies that kill user contributions. I am very
sad to witness this once again.
I have mixed feelings for this very reason. The concept of accepting
contributions on github is an EXCELLENT one.
On 13/05/2013 02:08, Rich Freeman wrote:
Second, I think this really points to there being value for something
like Gerrit available on Gentoo, which might be the best of both
worlds. I've never used it myself but I'm tempted to install it just
to start messing with it personally. I'd be
On Sun, 12 May 2013, Markos Chandras wrote:
This is the kind of policies that kill user contributions. I am very
sad to witness this once again.
I've nothing at all against mirroring the repository at github, or
against accepting pull requests there. However, I think that we
shouldn't rely on
Rich Freeman wrote:
Gerrit
..
I've never used it myself but I'm tempted to install it just to
start messing with it personally.
Go for it! It's a few steps to set up, but it's not too bad.
Michael Palimaka wrote:
I believe Gerrit has been suggested before and rejected because it
relies on
On 13/05/2013 03:20, Peter Stuge wrote:
I agree that Java is sucky, but I don't think that rejecting Gerrit
for that reason alone makes sense. Look at what the application does
and how it works, to determine if it fits the project or not.
I agree, but if infra is not willing to maintain
On Sunday 12 of May 2013 19:20:03 Peter Stuge wrote:
Rich Freeman wrote:
Gerrit
..
I've never used it myself but I'm tempted to install it just to
start messing with it personally.
Go for it! It's a few steps to set up, but it's not too bad.
Michael Palimaka wrote:
I believe
On Sunday 12 of May 2013 23:21:15 IAN DELANEY wrote:
# Ian Delaney idel...@gentoo.org (12 May 2013)
# Recommended by upstream's own maintainer to drop the
# package, no longer valid.
# Masked for removal in 30 days
dev-python/etsdevtools
# Ian Delaney idel...@gentoo.org (12 May 2013)
#
Theo Chatzimichos wrote:
Another option that looks nice is GitLab.
How does it work? The screenshots look exactly like github.
Don't ask, just go for it!
That's not very helpful?
I'm happy to expand on my experience with Gerrit, and I'll gladly
answer specific questions if I can.
Michael Palimaka wrote:
I agree that Java is sucky, but I don't think that rejecting Gerrit
for that reason alone makes sense. Look at what the application does
and how it works, to determine if it fits the project or not.
I agree, but if infra is not willing to maintain something java-based
On 13/05/2013 04:24, Peter Stuge wrote:
Michael Palimaka wrote:
I agree that Java is sucky, but I don't think that rejecting Gerrit
for that reason alone makes sense. Look at what the application does
and how it works, to determine if it fits the project or not.
I agree, but if infra is not
[...]
Another option that looks nice is GitLab.
How does it work? The screenshots look exactly like github.
Maybe, I can summarize it up a bit:
- GitLab is a Ruby-On-Rails Application
= Requires very few setup on a gentoo system: ruby, a webserver and a mysql
or postgresl database
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 12/05/13 20:24, Peter Stuge wrote:
[GitHub] enforces some particular workflow
You keep saying this. What do you mean? A lot of projects (including
Linux) just use GitHub for hosting and nothing else. I don't see the
problem.
- --
Alexander
Alexander Berntsen wrote:
[GitHub] enforces some particular workflow
You keep saying this. What do you mean?
I'll clarify!
A lot of projects (including Linux) just use GitHub for hosting and
nothing else. I don't see the problem.
There is no problem if github is only used for hosting,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 13/05/13 00:21, Peter Stuge wrote:
There is no problem if github is only used for hosting, but if it
is the primary point of contact, or if pull requests are accepted,
then github is also writing to repositories, and merge commits are
Alexander Berntsen wrote:
There is no problem if github is only used for hosting, but if it
is the primary point of contact, or if pull requests are accepted,
then github is also writing to repositories, and merge commits are
enforced for all external contributions. That does not scale at
On Mon, May 13, 2013 at 12:24:09AM +0200, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
On 13/05/13 00:21, Peter Stuge wrote:
There is no problem if github is only used for hosting, but if it
is the primary point of contact, or if pull requests are accepted,
then github is also writing to repositories, and
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed
from the tree, for the week ending 2013-05-12 23h59 UTC.
Removals:
gnome-extra/gnome-lirc-properties 2013-05-07 18:57:27 cardoe
dev-python/python-selinux 2013-05-07 19:22:18 swift
I've recently switched to using cave (part of the paludis project) as the
package manager for my system.
It's more conservative than emerge in some instances, specifically when it
comes to bare dependencies (DEPENDS or RDEPENDS that are un-versioned). For
example:
* The ebuild for
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 9:29 PM, Taahir Ahmed ahme...@tamu.edu wrote:
It should be noted that the first position (that the dependencies specified in
the ebuilds are not sufficient) is the position of cave's developers. I tend
to agree -- How is cave to know that there hasn't been a brekaing
On 12 May 2013 20:34, Markos Chandras hwoar...@gentoo.org wrote:
[...]
Besides, most fixes come from users (maybe not the actual patches but
they spot most of the problems) so providing an easier way for them to
contribute is preferred. Moreover, github provides other facilities
Is it easier
Newer prelinks can support /etc/prelink.conf.d/ files. So that prelink
can install /etc/prelink.conf and manage it itself, have env-update only
write /etc/prelink.conf.d/portage.conf instead of clobbering the main
/etc/prelink.conf file.
This should be backwards compatible as portage will
On 05/12/2013 05:49 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
Newer prelinks can support /etc/prelink.conf.d/ files. So that prelink
can install /etc/prelink.conf and manage it itself, have env-update only
write /etc/prelink.conf.d/portage.conf instead of clobbering the main
/etc/prelink.conf file.
This
40 matches
Mail list logo
