Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [DRAFT v2] GLEP 84: Standard format for package.mask files

2023-10-13 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2023, Arthur Zamarin wrote: >> Make this one either "[Bb]ugs? #\d+(,? #\d+)*" (which I'd prefer) >> or "[Bb]ugs? +#\d+(,? +#\d+)*". That is, same number of spaces in both >> locations. > OK, would be hard to define it correctly in the BNF, but will just use > {n} syntax to

Re: [gentoo-dev] [DRAFT v2] GLEP 84: Standard format for package.mask files

2023-10-13 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2023, Arthur Zamarin wrote: >>> PKGS_GROUP ::= {ATOM}(\n{ATOM})* >> >> Sorry, I had missed this when reading it the first time. Please avoid >> the term "atom" because neither PMS nor the Devmanual calls them so. > Oh, sorry, normal jargon from pkgcore work. How to call

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [DRAFT v2] GLEP 84: Standard format for package.mask files

2023-10-13 Thread Arthur Zamarin
On 13/10/2023 21.42, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > >> BUGS-LIST::= [Bb]ugs? #\d+(,? +#\d+)* > > Make this one either "[Bb]ugs? #\d+(,? #\d+)*" (which I'd prefer) > or "[Bb]ugs? +#\d+(,? +#\d+)*". That is, same number of spaces in both > locations. OK, would be hard to define it correctly in the

Re: [gentoo-dev] [DRAFT v2] GLEP 84: Standard format for package.mask files

2023-10-13 Thread Arthur Zamarin
On 13/10/2023 21.49, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >> On Fri, 13 Oct 2023, Arthur Zamarin wrote: > >> PKGS_GROUP ::= {ATOM}(\n{ATOM})* > > Sorry, I had missed this when reading it the first time. Please avoid > the term "atom" because neither PMS nor the Devmanual calls them so. Oh, sorry,

Re: [gentoo-dev] [DRAFT v2] GLEP 84: Standard format for package.mask files

2023-10-13 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2023, Arthur Zamarin wrote: > PKGS_GROUP ::= {ATOM}(\n{ATOM})* Sorry, I had missed this when reading it the first time. Please avoid the term "atom" because neither PMS nor the Devmanual calls them so. Ulrich signature.asc Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [DRAFT v2] GLEP 84: Standard format for package.mask files

2023-10-13 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2023, Arthur Zamarin wrote: >>> The paragraph should be of format ``Removal on ${DATE}. ${BUGS-LIST}``, >>> where >>> the date is RFC-3339 full-date format, meaning ``-MM-DD``, and the bugs >>> list is of the `bugs list`_ format. The listed bugs should include the >>>

[gentoo-dev] Re: [DRAFT v2] GLEP 84: Standard format for package.mask files

2023-10-13 Thread Arthur Zamarin
On 13/10/2023 19.06, Ulrich Mueller wrote: >> On Fri, 13 Oct 2023, Arthur Zamarin wrote: > >> Comments Block >> -- > >> The comments block consists of 2 mandatory parts (`author line`_ and >> `explanation`_) and one optional part (`last-rite epilogue`_). A blank line >> to >>

[gentoo-dev] Re: [DRAFT v2] GLEP 84: Standard format for package.mask files

2023-10-13 Thread Ulrich Mueller
> On Fri, 13 Oct 2023, Arthur Zamarin wrote: > Comments Block > -- > The comments block consists of 2 mandatory parts (`author line`_ and > `explanation`_) and one optional part (`last-rite epilogue`_). A blank line to > separate the parts is optional. Trailing whitespace should

[gentoo-dev] [DRAFT v2] GLEP 84: Standard format for package.mask files

2023-10-13 Thread Arthur Zamarin
This is the second version of the GLEP after previous recommendations and suggestions [1] - thank you for all who participated. Similar to previously, the draft can also be found on glep-0084 branch [2]. [1] https://public-inbox.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/u5y3ky...@gentoo.org/T/ [2]

Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH] java-pkg-simple.eclass: drop EAPI 6

2023-10-13 Thread Bruce NCNP
unsubscribe Volkmar W. Pogatzki 于 2023年9月29日周五 16:27写道: > Signed-off-by: Volkmar W. Pogatzki > --- > eclass/java-pkg-simple.eclass | 3 +-- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/eclass/java-pkg-simple.eclass b/eclass/java-pkg-simple.eclass > index