Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change (v4)

> On Thu, 11 Jan 2018, Aaron W Swenson wrote: > 2018-01-11-GnuCash-Breaking-Change.en.txt Since its last update, GLEP 42 strongly recommends using a very short name, with at most 20 characters for the short-name identifier [1] (whose main purpose is to keep the name unique if more than one

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v3] profiles.desc: Lower some profiles with broken depgraph from dev to exp

On 1/11/18 4:47 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > I withdraw this since everyone obviously has his special workflow and we > can't touch anything. Now the CI report is 3.5M large and lists over 900 > broken packages. Please start looking into fixing your profiles. Thank > you. > Now that you

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change (v4)

Revision number 4. Title: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change Author: Aaron W. Swenson Posted: 2018-01-11 Revision: 1 News-Item-Format: 2.0 Display-If-Installed: gnucash-2.6.sql.xz For PostgreSQL: $ pg_dump -U gnucash_user -Z 5 gnucash_db > gnucash-2.6.sql.gz For SQLite: $ cp

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v3] profiles.desc: Lower some profiles with broken depgraph from dev to exp

W dniu czw, 11.01.2018 o godzinie 21∶40 +0100, użytkownik Michał Górny napisał: > --- > profiles/profiles.desc | 80 > +- > 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/profiles/profiles.desc b/profiles/profiles.desc > index

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change (v3)

On 2018-01-11 19:02, Francesco Riosa wrote: > It could be wise to close GnuCash before backup Good point. Added a line. > also the choice of creating a copy of the database is a bit unusual, > an offline backup may be more appropriated, example for mysql: > mysqldump gnucash_db | xz >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v2] profiles.desc: Lower profiles with broken depgraph from dev to exp

On 1/11/18 2:45 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Lower those of dev profiles that currently have broken depgraph to exp > status. This will allow us to enable CI runs for dev profiles without > triggering new issues, and start actively pursing improving exp > profiles to dev one by one. > --- >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v2] profiles.desc: Lower profiles with broken depgraph from dev to exp

On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 21:35 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > The point of dev is to bring staging warnings so that we can improve > the depgraph. If you really insist, we can start with dev status for > arm64 & mips. But it'd be more readable if we worked on only one arch > simultaneously. Keep 17.0

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH v3] profiles.desc: Lower some profiles with broken depgraph from dev to exp

--- profiles/profiles.desc | 80 +- 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 40 deletions(-) diff --git a/profiles/profiles.desc b/profiles/profiles.desc index 4e3223a76b14..13cb5d0922c0 100644 --- a/profiles/profiles.desc +++ b/profiles/profiles.desc @@

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v2] profiles.desc: Lower profiles with broken depgraph from dev to exp

W dniu czw, 11.01.2018 o godzinie 22∶30 +0200, użytkownik Mart Raudsepp napisał: > On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 21:27 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > > W dniu czw, 11.01.2018 o godzinie 22∶17 +0200, użytkownik Mart > > Raudsepp > > napisał: > > > On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 20:45 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v2] profiles.desc: Lower profiles with broken depgraph from dev to exp

On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 21:27 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > W dniu czw, 11.01.2018 o godzinie 22∶17 +0200, użytkownik Mart > Raudsepp > napisał: > > On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 20:45 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > > >  # ARM64 Profiles > > > -arm64   default/linux/arm64/13.0 >

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v2] profiles.desc: Lower profiles with broken depgraph from dev to exp

On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 22:17 +0200, Mart Raudsepp wrote: > On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 20:45 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > >  # ARM64 Profiles > > -arm64   default/linux/arm64/13.0    > > dev > > +arm64   default/linux/arm64/13.0    > > exp > >  

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v2] profiles.desc: Lower profiles with broken depgraph from dev to exp

W dniu czw, 11.01.2018 o godzinie 22∶17 +0200, użytkownik Mart Raudsepp napisał: > On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 20:45 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > > # ARM64 Profiles > > -arm64 default/linux/arm64/13.0dev > > +arm64 default/linux/arm64/13.0

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH v2] profiles.desc: Lower profiles with broken depgraph from dev to exp

On Thu, 2018-01-11 at 20:45 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: >  # ARM64 Profiles > -arm64   default/linux/arm64/13.0    dev > +arm64   default/linux/arm64/13.0    exp >  arm64   default/linux/arm64/13.0/desktop    exp > -arm64   

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:22:17PM +0900, Benda Xu wrote: > Hi, > > "Andreas K. Huettel" writes: > > > If, as a non-developer, you want to participate in a discussion on > > gentoo-dev, > > - either reply directly to the author of a list mail and ask him/her to > >

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH v2] profiles.desc: Lower profiles with broken depgraph from dev to exp

Lower those of dev profiles that currently have broken depgraph to exp status. This will allow us to enable CI runs for dev profiles without triggering new issues, and start actively pursing improving exp profiles to dev one by one. --- profiles/profiles.desc | 104

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 2/2] repoman: Enable testing exp profiles by default

On 01/11/2018 05:43 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 14∶56 -0800, użytkownik Zac Medico > napisał: >> On 01/10/2018 02:24 PM, Michał Górny wrote: >>> Enable repoman checks on exp profiles by default to improve >>> the dependency graph integrity on those profiles and help

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change (v3)

2018-01-11 17:27 GMT+01:00 Aaron W. Swenson : > This time with a version constrain that should allow this to expire at > some point in the future. > > Title: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change > Author: Aaron W. Swenson > Posted: 2018-01-11 > Revision: 1 >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018, at 11:34 CST, Rich Freeman wrote: > It is kind of hard to get new people interested in fixing bugs when > half the traffic is complaining because the people doing the work > aren't doing it in a way that makes the people not doing the work feel >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:07 PM, Peter Stuge wrote: > Maybe this is a discussion for -project, then? > Getting these kinds of non-technical discussions off of -dev is most of the point of this. The purpose of this list is discussion of things like eclass changes, fixing bugs,

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

Maybe this is a discussion for -project, then? Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > a few outside trolls who > * keep pushing their personal agenda in endless threads, > * confuse their own inability to contribute with being a mistreated underdog, > * and keep commenting opinionated on technical things

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

Michał Górny schrieb: I guess you should have voiced your opinion back when discussion was taking place instead of being hostile *now* because the Council listened to what the developers requested. The arguments why these posting restrictions are a pretty bad idea have all been voiced back

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change (v3)

This time with a version constrain that should allow this to expire at some point in the future. Title: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change Author: Aaron W. Swenson Posted: 2018-01-11 Revision: 1 News-Item-Format: 2.0 Display-If-Installed:

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 2/2] repoman: Enable testing exp profiles by default

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 2:48 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > Dnia 11 stycznia 2018 07:54:40 CET, Mike Gilbert > napisał(a): >>On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 11:10 PM, Michał Górny >>wrote: >>> W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 21∶45 -0500,

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 1/2] repoman: Add a new 'badinexp' warning class for exp profiles

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 5:24 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > Add a new 'badinexp' (+ 'badmaskedinexp') warning class that is likewise > 'badindev' but for 'exp' profiles. This will allow us to more > proactively inform developers of exp profile breakages without actually > making

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 3:53 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > I guess you should have voiced your opinion back when discussion was > taking place instead of being hostile *now* because the Council listened > to what the developers requested. > > And if you are curious, then I've been

[gentoo-dev] [PATCH] introduce Prefix 17.0 profiles.

On Wednesday, January 10, 2018, Benda Xu wrote: > Hi MJ, > > "M. J. Everitt" writes: > >> Not entirely as a #gentoo-nit-pick .. I'm slightly unclear on the >> different between 2.6.16+ and 2.6.32+ .. should this potentially be >> 2.16.16-32 perhaps

Re: [gentoo-dev] Improving the support for minor arches and less common profiles in CI

W dniu nie, 07.01.2018 o godzinie 21∶25 +0100, użytkownik Michał Górny napisał: > W dniu sob, 06.01.2018 o godzinie 12∶10 +0100, użytkownik Michał Górny > napisał: > > So I'm thinking of an alternate idea: to start adding staging warnings > > for additional profile class, combined with arch

Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 2/2] repoman: Enable testing exp profiles by default

W dniu śro, 10.01.2018 o godzinie 14∶56 -0800, użytkownik Zac Medico napisał: > On 01/10/2018 02:24 PM, Michał Górny wrote: > > Enable repoman checks on exp profiles by default to improve > > the dependency graph integrity on those profiles and help them on their > > way towards stable status.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On 2018.01.11 01:03, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: > > Does being 'struck off' the list in this way apply to devs, > including > > Council and comrel members? > > So far noone has even considered "striking" devs off the list. If this > even > were to happen ever, it would have to be backed by a full

Re: [gentoo-dev] News Item: GnuCash 2.7+ Breaking Change

On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 20:00 -0500, Aaron W. Swenson wrote: > On 2018-01-10 22:53, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 17:48:32 -0500 > > "Aaron W. Swenson" wrote: > > > Modified a bit. This should show for anyone who has GnuCash > > > installed. > > > > For

Re: [gentoo-dev] about stable, dev and exp profile status

January 11, 2018 9:52 AM, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote: > On 11/01/2018 08:43, Fabian Groffen wrote: > >> I always was under the impression the following order (and explanation) >> was the case: >> >> stable -> development -> experimental >> >> For this reason, e.g. Prefix

Re: [gentoo-dev] about stable, dev and exp profile status

Dnia 11 stycznia 2018 08:43:32 CET, Fabian Groffen napisał(a): >On 07-01-2018 21:25:28 +0100, Michał Górny wrote: >> I'd like to follow this with a more precise proposal. Namely, >redefine >> the current profile statuses to apply the following: >> >> a. stable -> fully

Re: [gentoo-dev] about stable, dev and exp profile status

On 11/01/2018 08:43, Fabian Groffen wrote: > I always was under the impression the following order (and explanation) > was the case: > > stable -> development -> experimental > > For this reason, e.g. Prefix profiles are (still) experimental, which > means they really shouldn't bother non-Prefix

Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

On Thu, 11 Jan 2018 10:03:54 +0300 Eray Aslan wrote: >On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 08:55:11AM +0100, Lars Wendler wrote: >> Seems we're turning into an elitist club or something... > >Elitist seems too kind a word. Knee-jerk reaction, petty vendetta, >impulsive emotional reaction comes to mind -

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] introduce Prefix 17.0 profiles.

On 11/01/18 03:18, Benda Xu wrote: > Hi MJ, > > "M. J. Everitt" writes: > >> Not entirely as a #gentoo-nit-pick .. I'm slightly unclear on the >> different between 2.6.16+ and 2.6.32+ .. should this potentially be >> 2.16.16-32 perhaps [2.6.16~32 even] or is this more obvious

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list

Hi Gordon, On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 23:37:39 -0600 Gordon Pettey wrote: >On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 10:22 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: >> Andreas K. Huettel posted on Thu, 11 Jan 2018 02:12:47 +0100 as >> excerpted: >>> Am Mittwoch, 10. Januar 2018, 18:16:33 CET schrieb Vincent-Xavier >>>