On 18/02/15 09:12, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 08:48:19 +0100
Justin (jlec) j...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 18/02/15 08:40, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
I seem to recall the developer quizzes may have had (or indeed
requested) some more information on this matter.
The test ebuild focuses
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 08:48:19 +0100
Justin (jlec) j...@gentoo.org wrote:
On 18/02/15 08:40, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
I seem to recall the developer quizzes may have had (or indeed
requested) some more information on this matter.
The test ebuild focuses on this topic.
What is that?
jer
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 09:34:21 +0100
Justin (jlec) j...@gentoo.org wrote:
At the end of the review session we ask the recruits to fix an ebuild
which has numerous technical and, as mentioned, legal aspects to take
care of.
That's a novelty I wasn't aware of, then. The technical
practicalities
On 18/02/15 09:48, Jeroen Roovers wrote:
On Wed, 18 Feb 2015 09:34:21 +0100
Justin (jlec) j...@gentoo.org wrote:
At the end of the review session we ask the recruits to fix an ebuild
which has numerous technical and, as mentioned, legal aspects to take
care of.
That's a novelty I wasn't
El mié, 18-02-2015 a las 03:11 +, Duncan escribió:
Pacho Ramos posted on Mon, 16 Feb 2015 14:34:50 +0100 as excerpted:
The current policy of maintainers dropping keywords after 90 days is
simply not applied because it leads up to that maintainer needing to
kill himself that keyword
Is there a communication problem?
I don't remember getting either:
* a bug report
* a ping
* a review request
Did I miss something?
Justin Lecher (jlec):
jlec15/02/17 13:39:15
Modified: ChangeLog
Added:watchdog-0.8.3.ebuild
Log:
Version Bump
Patrick Lauer:
ebuild.badheader,
That would break repoman for the majority of overlays. You don't really
expect overlay maintainers to follow gentoo copyright, do you?
Really... before repoman is fixed, none of this will happen (or people
will just run a hacked repoman version).
Dnia 2015-02-18, o godz. 16:11:53
Mike Frysinger (vapier) vap...@gentoo.org napisał(a):
vapier 15/02/18 16:11:53
Modified: fcaps.eclass
Log:
clarify USE=filecaps intention #540430
Revision ChangesPath
1.11 eclass/fcaps.eclass
Please commit
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:27 AM, Tom Gall tg...@gentoo.org wrote:
So first, for those interested in cheap arm64 hardware, the first 96 board
is going to start shipping in March for ~$129. The HiKey board is an 8 way
64 bit ARM board with 8 A53 cores. (No A57s bummer!) Only had a gig of
The topic of a review workflow comes up frequently, but Gitlab, Gerrit,
etc. are blocked on a host of other problems that may never be resolved.
It would still be nice to be able to request reviews somewhere, and for
ebuilds, a mailing list combined with a threaded MUA works fine.
Would anyone
So first, for those interested in cheap arm64 hardware, the first 96 board is
going to start shipping in March for ~$129. The HiKey board is an 8 way 64 bit
ARM board with 8 A53 cores. (No A57s bummer!) Only had a gig of memory on the
board but it’s not a bad device. I’ve had one for about 2-3
# Michael Palimaka kensing...@gentoo.org (19 Feb 2015)
# Doesn't work with current version of ruby. Dead upstream.
# Masked for removal in 30 days.
games-board/kaya
On 16 Feb 2015 11:45, Rafael Goncalves Martins wrote:
On Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
On 16 Feb 2015 21:00, Patrick Lauer wrote:
Thus I suggest making the following warnings proper errors:
some of these are because they produce false positives. at least these bugs
On 18 Feb 2015 23:10, Mike Gilbert wrote:
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 7:08 PM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wednesday 18 February 2015 18:43:59 hasufell wrote:
Is there a communication problem?
I don't remember getting either:
* a bug report
* a ping
* a review request
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 7:08 PM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote:
On Wednesday 18 February 2015 18:43:59 hasufell wrote:
Is there a communication problem?
I don't remember getting either:
* a bug report
* a ping
* a review request
Did I miss something?
Yes.
Why is this package
The attached patch proposes two helper functions to be added to
qmake-utils.eclass. These functions echo the correct directory where
qt binaries such as moc and lrelease are located. They can be used in
ebuilds when such binaries need to be called directly. (Ebuilds should
not rely on qtchooser
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Justin (jlec) wrote:
This is part of the set of topics which we
cover outside the scope of the quizzes.
A brief comment from reality is that this legal problem is quit
likely a significant hurdle for many potential developers
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 12:58 PM, Ben de Groot yng...@gentoo.org wrote:
The attached patch proposes two helper functions to be added to
qmake-utils.eclass. These functions echo the correct directory where
qt binaries such as moc and lrelease are located. They can be used in
ebuilds when such
Rich Freeman wrote:
This is part of the set of topics which we
cover outside the scope of the quizzes.
A brief comment from reality is that this legal problem is quit
likely a significant hurdle for many potential developers - as for me.
If you want contributing to be easy, overhead
Justin (jlec) wrote:
This is part of the set of topics which we
cover outside the scope of the quizzes.
A brief comment from reality is that this legal problem is quit
likely a significant hurdle for many potential developers - as for me.
If you want contributing to be easy, overhead like this
On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Peter Stuge pe...@stuge.se wrote:
Rich Freeman wrote:
The only things devs need to do with respect to copyright is follow
the law
Ah, but which law? I understand that law in e.g. Germany does not
permit non-natural persons to own copyright. The public domain
On Feb 18, 2015, at 2:32 PM, C Bergström cbergst...@pathscale.com wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:27 AM, Tom Gall tg...@gentoo.org
mailto:tg...@gentoo.org wrote:
So first, for those interested in cheap arm64 hardware, the first 96 board is
going to start shipping in March for ~$129.
Patrick Lauer:
Why is this package metadata missing the python herd for no reason?
Because the python herd doesn't currently maintain the package, nor did
they ask me to be co-maintainers.
Also
Why are you pretending to own packages when we're supposed to be working
together as a
On Wednesday 18 February 2015 18:43:59 hasufell wrote:
Is there a communication problem?
I don't remember getting either:
* a bug report
* a ping
* a review request
Did I miss something?
Yes.
Why is this package metadata missing the python herd for no reason?
Also
Why are you
On 02/18/15 15:32, C Bergström wrote:
On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 3:27 AM, Tom Gall tg...@gentoo.org wrote:
So first, for those interested in cheap arm64 hardware, the first 96 board
is going to start shipping in March for ~$129. The HiKey board is an 8 way
64 bit ARM board with 8 A53 cores. (No
On Thursday 19 February 2015 00:48:18 hasufell wrote:
Patrick Lauer:
Why is this package metadata missing the python herd for no reason?
Because the python herd doesn't currently maintain the package, nor did
they ask me to be co-maintainers.
So you put a python package in the dev-python
26 matches
Mail list logo
