Gentoo Archives: gentoo-commits

From: "Thomas Anderson (gentoofan23)" <gentoofan23@g.o>
To: gentoo-commits@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-commits] gentoo commit in xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs: 20090326-summary.txt 20090326.txt
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 12:31:44
Message-Id: E1LoGeT-00069w-IL@stork.gentoo.org
1 gentoofan23 09/03/30 12:31:41
2
3 Added: 20090326-summary.txt 20090326.txt
4 Log:
5 Add council log and summary from meeting on 03/26/09
6
7 Revision Changes Path
8 1.1 xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20090326-summary.txt
9
10 file : http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20090326-summary.txt?rev=1.1&view=markup
11 plain: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20090326-summary.txt?rev=1.1&content-type=text/plain
12
13 Index: 20090326-summary.txt
14 ===================================================================
15 Roll Call:
16 ===========
17 Betelgeuse: here
18 Cardoe: absent
19 dberkholz: here
20 dertobi123: here
21 dev-zero: here
22 leio: here
23 lu_zero: here
24 tanderson(secretary): here
25
26 Topics:
27 ===========
28
29 GLEP 55:
30 Petteri noted that portage had recently gotten support for both GLEP
31 55 and the parse-eapi proposal. Petteri will have benchmarks done by
32 the next meeting.
33
34 EAPI-3 Proposals:
35 A call for objections to/questions about any of the various proposals
36 was asked for. What follows is a list of proposals to which objections were
37 raised or for which there are open questions as well as who raised the
38 points.
39
40 slot operator support:
41 leio, open questions, position pending on answers
42 default_src_install:
43 leio, open questions
44 dberkholz
45 dertobi123
46 doinclude:
47 dberkholz
48 leio
49 dosed:
50 dberkholz
51 unpack failing on unknown types:
52 dberkholz
53 docompress:
54 leio, needs to review proposal and prepalldocs
55 dev-zero, thinks it's useless
56 doexample:
57 dev-zero, thinks it should have -r if we have it at all
58 dohard being deprecated:
59 leio, thinks it should remain and have its bugs fixed.
60 disable-dependency-tracking:
61 lu_zero, possible breakage of configure scripts(mplayer & ffmpeg mentioned)
62 utility commands should die by default:
63 leio, open questions
64 ban || ( foo? ( . ) . ):
65 leio, sees no reason to ban something that might have some valid use cases
66
67 One part of the EAPI-3 discussion is whether to have variables that
68 behind-the-scenes control the default functions. The DOCS variable was
69 created so that a list of documentation to install can be passed to
70 default_src_install. A 4-2 vote approved the DOCS variable for use in
71 src_install. Specific details have not yet been worked out.
72
73 Open Floor:
74 ===========
75
76 Ned Ludd(solar) requested that the council discuss a migration of KEYWORDS out
77 of ebuilds to be discussed at the next meeting.
78
79
80
81 1.1 xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20090326.txt
82
83 file : http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20090326.txt?rev=1.1&view=markup
84 plain: http://sources.gentoo.org/viewcvs.py/gentoo/xml/htdocs/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20090326.txt?rev=1.1&content-type=text/plain
85
86 Index: 20090326.txt
87 ===================================================================
88 16:01 <@Betelgeuse> so are we starting
89 16:01 <@dberkholz> yep
90 16:01 <@leio> where does that assumption come from
91 16:01 <@dertobi123> heya
92 16:01 <@lu_zero> apparently
93 16:01 <@leio> ok, nevermind for now
94 16:01 <@dberkholz> i was typing and was interrupted by a salad dish =P
95 16:01 <@dev-zero> leio: what assumption?
96 16:01 <+tanderson> mmmm, yummy
97 16:01 <@dberkholz> council folks, speak up please
98 16:01 < ciaranm> leio: if the assumption doesn't hold, you're into "stuff that doesn't work with existing EAPIs anyway" territory, and slot operator deps don't affect it
99 16:01 <@leio> that >=foo/bar-2:= means 2, 3 or 4, but not 1
100 16:01 <@dev-zero> dberkholz: another desert for me please
101 16:02 <@dberkholz> tanderson: can you list anyone on council who hasn't spoken since 2000
102 16:02 -!- psychoschlumpf [i=lars@unaffiliated/psychoschlumpf] has joined #gentoo-council
103 16:02 <@dev-zero> leio: read what ciaran said completely :)
104 16:02 < ciaranm> leio: if it doesn't, you can't use existing deps correctly anyway
105 16:02 <@leio> There are two parts in there
106 16:02 <@leio> >=foo/bar-2
107 16:02 <@leio> and :=
108 16:02 <@leio> Some foo/bar-2.0.1 might be SLOT=1
109 16:02 <@dev-zero> leio, ciaranm: I guess we should do that discussion later
110 16:03 <@leio> exactly, nevermind for now
111 16:03 < ciaranm> leio: ...in which case you're in "doesn't work with existing deps anyway, so unrelated to the proposal" territory
112 16:03 <+tanderson> dberkholz: Cardoe
113 16:03 <+tanderson> I knew I was missing someone...
114 16:04 <@leio> Cardoe had asked dang to proxy on #gentoo-desktop the other day
115 16:04 <+tanderson> well, dang isn't here either...
116 16:04 <@dberkholz> neither of them are on freenode
117 16:04 <@lu_zero> hmm
118 16:04 <+tanderson> dang it :P
119 16:04 <@dberkholz> if anyone's got im handy, please ping
120 16:05 <@dev-zero> is there a way we can store that info on a voluntary basis in the ldap?
121 16:05 <@dberkholz> we already do
122 16:05 <@dev-zero> ah, ok
123 16:05 <@dberkholz> gentooIM or so
124 16:05 <@dev-zero> then I have to go updating my info there :)
125 16:05 <@dberkholz> so let's get rolling
126 16:06 <@dberkholz> EAPI=3. i'd like to see people mention any specific features they've got questions for or want to reject entirely
127 16:06 <@dberkholz> i think only dev-zero and i have done this on the list
128 16:06 <@leio> the SLOT operator stuff is hazy for me. A nice concrete user facing documentation blurb would be appreciated
129 16:06 < ciaranm> dberkholz: Betelgeuse did too 15m or so ago
130 16:07 <@dberkholz> ah, thanks. been eating dinner and all that.
131 16:07 * solar requests that you start at the top of the draft vs the middle of it
132 16:08 * dev-zero agrees with solar
133 16:08 <@lu_zero> there is a quick link with the up to date list?
134 16:08 <@dev-zero> see topic
135 16:08 <+tanderson> solar: yep, nice for summaries as well
136 16:08 <@dberkholz> ok, sure.
137 16:08 <@leio> what, we are going to go through all of them again in a meeting?
138 16:09 <+tanderson> dleverton had PMS copies available as well, since my computer is still struggling to compile texlive
139 16:09 <@dev-zero> we can group them by priority
140 16:09 <@dberkholz> i've got an idea
141 16:09 <@Betelgeuse> The only thing I see useful to do here is to assign people to take care of getting them implemented
142 16:09 <@Betelgeuse> I can take a couple
143 16:09 <@dev-zero> I already started :)
144 16:10 <@dberkholz> does anyone who hasn't posted on the list have questions or problems with specific features that they want to say here?
145 16:10 <@lu_zero> ...
146 16:10 < solar> yes
147 16:10 < solar> but towards the end
148 16:10 < hwoarang> not right now :)
149 16:11 <@dev-zero> ok, pkg_pretend and the USe dep modifiers have already been accepted
150 16:11 <@leio> yes, but details on list after meeting would be best, sorry for not doing it before-hand.
151 16:11 <@dev-zero> slot operator support as implemented in kdebuild ... leio has a question there
152 16:12 <@dertobi123> well, probably yeah ... but i wasn't able to do so on-list before the meetingt
153 16:12 <@dertobi123> meeting*
154 16:12 <@dberkholz> hmm
155 16:12 <@dev-zero> leio: your question is about certain use cases, right?
156 16:12 <@dberkholz> can we collect a specific list of features that people have questions/problems with now, and not actually discuss the questions?
157 16:12 <@leio> yes, and actual examples and user documentation
158 16:12 <@dberkholz> that way we at least know what's blocking
159 16:13 <@dev-zero> dberkholz: ok, let's first do that and then discuss the concrete questions right afterwards
160 16:13 <@lu_zero> or that there are enough features worth an eapi bump
161 16:13 <@dev-zero> lu_zero: do you doubt that?
162 16:13 < ciaranm> user documentation for slot operator deps is easy. just tell people that if they build+run dep on something that has multiple slots, they should append either :* or :=.
163 16:13 <@leio> regarding dohard deprecation I'm reserved about. It should be handled when possible and the portage bug needs to be fixed anyhow (actual packages are getting lots of copies of the same file because hard links are lost, irrelevant to dohard)
164 16:13 <+tanderson> I could do devmanual patches easily for docs
165 16:14 <@dberkholz> whoever has a feature they have a question/problem with, just say to me (dberkholz: $feature) what the feature is, so tanderson can collect a list of what feature and who
166 16:14 <@lu_zero> dev-zero after discussion we can either wait or go on with what is already accepted
167 16:14 <@dev-zero> tanderson: that'd be great because I don't want to touch that thing
168 16:14 <@dev-zero> leio: I don't think there's a good way to handle it properly
169 16:14 <+tanderson> dberkholz: it's easier to prefix that with tanderson since then I'll just look for highlights :)
170 16:15 <@dberkholz> either way. already one false positive
171 16:15 <@dberkholz> you've got 5 minutes =P
172 16:15 <+tanderson> *cricket* :P
173 16:15 < hwoarang> dberkholz: doinclude seems useless to me
174 16:15 <@leio> Are we talking about open questions about a feature, or rejections too? ;p
175 16:16 <@dev-zero> leio: both
176 16:16 <@leio> like I'm clear on some of them but definitely rejecting
177 16:16 <@lu_zero> which ones?
178 16:16 <@dev-zero> dberkholz: mind posting yours too?
179 16:16 <@leio> tanderson: slot operator support (open questions, might be against depending on the answer to those)
180 16:17 <@leio> tanderson: default src_install (there are already open questions still there per dev-zero's summary - same thing)
181 16:17 <@Betelgeuse> I wonder if the slot operator stuff would better be postponed to go in with labels.
182 16:17 <@Betelgeuse> ciaranm: Does that make sense^?
183 16:17 < ciaranm> Betelgeuse: labels solve a different problem
184 16:17 <@lu_zero> tanderson I'm against disable-dependency-tracking in econf by default
185 16:17 <@dberkholz> tanderson: default src_install; doinclude; dosed
186 16:18 < ciaranm> Betelgeuse: you *could* co-opt it into labels, but it's messy, because labels work on groups, and operators work on individual things
187 16:18 <@dberkholz> tanderson: unpack should fail on unknown types
188 16:18 <@dberkholz> i think that's it off dev-zero's list
189 16:19 < ciaranm> lu_zero: what's wrong with disable-dependency-tracking? not heard any objections to that before
190 16:19 <@leio> tanderson: docompress (I need to review what prepalldocs does and compare it closer to the proposed thing, so not open question, just needing more time to be sure)
191 16:19 <@lu_zero> ciaranm there are configure script rejecting it
192 16:19 <@dberkholz> remember, we're not discussing yet... hold off till we're done
193 16:19 <+tanderson> leio: not sure what to classify that one as then
194 16:19 <@lu_zero> (sadly)
195 16:19 < ciaranm> lu_zero: which ones, and why?
196 16:19 <@lu_zero> hand made ones
197 16:19 <@leio> tanderson: ignore I guess unless I bring up on ml
198 16:19 <@Betelgeuse> lu_zero: Well just have a way to disable the behaviour
199 16:20 <@dev-zero> tanderson: docompress ... I still think it's useless
200 16:20 <+tanderson> leio: ok
201 16:20 <@dev-zero> tanderson: doexample must have -r if at all
202 16:20 <@lu_zero> Betelgeuse ok
203 16:20 <@dertobi123> tanderson: default src_install; doexample
204 16:21 < dleverton_> Are hand-made configuration scripts going to accept the arguments that econf already passes?
205 16:21 <@lu_zero> dleverton_ yes
206 16:21 <@leio> tanderson: regarding "Limit values in $USE to the ones in $IUSE" I need to just educate the developers about what LINGUAS is and isn't better.
207 16:21 <@dberkholz> not all of them. i've got examples
208 16:21 < ciaranm> lu_zero: there're hand-made configure scripts that take everything econf passes but not disable-dependency-tracking? examples please
209 16:21 <@lu_zero> ffmpeg ?
210 16:21 <@lu_zero> mplayer ?
211 16:23 < ciaranm> they take weird stuff we already pass like --host and --localstatedir, but barf on --disable-dependency-tracking?
212 16:23 <@dberkholz> anyone still got things to list to me / tanderson ?
213 16:23 <@lu_zero> anyway if econf is tailed to work with autotool generated configure
214 16:23 <@leio> tanderson: Deprecate "|| ( foo? ( . ) . )" in depend -- should not need an EAPI rule to ban it completely to avoid mis-use, and I see no reason to start banning various specific DEPEND constructs and be required to parse for all the EAPI rejected stuff and so on, while there might be 1-10% valid use cases
215 16:23 <@lu_zero> and is stated
216 16:23 <@lu_zero> I'm fine with adding them
217 16:23 < ciaranm> econf already passes autotools-specific weirdness
218 16:23 <@leio> tanderson: dohard - should remain and bugs fixed instead imho
219 16:23 < ciaranm> leio: banning it across EAPIs is a clean way of getting rid of it. and there are no valid use cases.
220 16:24 < ciaranm> dohard is probably unfixable
221 16:24 <@dev-zero> ciaranm: it is
222 16:24 <+tanderson> leio: as far as I'm aware there have been no correct usecases for || ( foo? ( . ) . )
223 16:24 <@leio> tanderson: doinclude - mostly unnecessary . Might be interesting for the potential +x removing bit, but build systems should install them properly really
224 16:25 <@leio> tanderson: .xz support - never heard of what it is and it doesn't appear to be a mature packing format yet. Does it mean portage will have to rdepend on the unpacking tool of it?
225 16:25 <@dev-zero> leio: no, it doesn't mean that
226 16:25 <@leio> tanderson: --disable-dependency-tracking and --enable-fast-install -- would be nice, but some scripts don't take them and fail
227 16:25 < ciaranm> leio: deps for .xz things are like deps for .rar, which unpack already does
228 16:26 <@dev-zero> btw, it has been requested that .xpi gets added to the new extensions unpack supports
229 16:26 <@leio> package needs to DEPEND on the unpacker? Fine.
230 16:26 <@lu_zero> and xpi is stable and widespread
231 16:26 < ciaranm> what unpacks xpi, and how horrid is its interface?
232 16:26 <@leio> tanderson: utility commands should die -- documented open questions
233 16:26 < psychoschlumpf> isnt --enable-fast-install enabled per default for autoconf configure scripts
234 16:26 <@lu_zero> ciaranm zip
235 16:26 <@dberkholz> can anyone speak up now if they haven't yet said they have issues with EAPI=3 features?
236 16:27 < ciaranm> xpi's easy enough then, so i have no opinion on it
237 16:27 <@leio> tanderson: "provide ebuilds a way to differentiate between updates and removals" -- seems to duplicate REPLACING_VERSIONS
238 16:27 <@dberkholz> tanderson: you have a list of features now?
239 16:27 < ciaranm> leio: uh, that *is* REPLACING_VERSIONS
240 16:27 <@dev-zero> jup, my bad, sorry
241 16:27 <@lu_zero> then it's a dupe
242 16:27 <@leio> sorry, I'm going by dev-zero list
243 16:27 <@dev-zero> leio: no problem, my fault
244 16:27 <@dberkholz> the description needs changing, i guess
245 16:28 <@dev-zero> I'll do that after the discussion to not even confuse people even further ;-)
246 16:28 <@leio> lots of the stuff at the end seems to have unclear things
247 16:29 <@dev-zero> leio: which ones=
248 16:29 <@lu_zero> leio you mean "Non-fast Features"
249 16:29 <@dev-zero> ?
250 16:29 < ciaranm> leio: go by the pms draft for clear specifics
251 16:29 < solar> If you are at the end. Then Non-fast Features -> src_test() listed is a no go.
252 16:29 <@leio> nah, I think just one or two of the stuff before non-fast features had mentioned open questions too.
253 16:30 <@leio> as for non-fast features
254 16:30 <@dev-zero> solar: that's why it's non-fast, not considered for eapi-3 unless someone explicitly asks for it
255 16:30 <@dev-zero> (should have chosen a better title though)
256 16:30 <@leio> most of them have no description in dev-zero summary
257 16:30 * ciaranm asked for it, on the grounds that src_test is useless without it
258 16:30 <@leio> regarding
259 16:30 <@leio> src_test run unless RESTRICTed or explicitly disabled by the user
260 16:30 <@leio> completely against it, in any form
261 16:30 <@lu_zero> ciaranm src_test should be triggered by repoman
262 16:30 <@Betelgeuse> ciaranm: well I do have arch teams using src_test to catch stuff so it's not useless
263 16:31 < solar> well as stated. The core problem there is if $CBUILD != $CHOST
264 16:31 <@dberkholz> ok, let's skip non-fast things in the interest of getting this in the tree by the end of april
265 16:31 <@Betelgeuse> ciaranm: probably could be more useful of course
266 16:31 < ciaranm> lu_zero: yes, because that works *brilliantly* for detecting failures on user systems.
267 16:31 < ciaranm> solar: ebuilds don't support cross compiling, so it's not an issue
268 16:31 <@dberkholz> sarcasm not necessary...
269 16:31 <@lu_zero> ciaranm user system having src_test enable is a failure by itself
270 16:31 <@lu_zero> since the time and resources needed by certain testsuites
271 16:31 < ciaranm> lu_zero: no, it's a basic sanity feature. for those certain test suites you can override it.
272 16:31 <@Betelgeuse> If we were to enable to now, my bet would be that most users would just disable it.
273 16:31 <@dev-zero> lu_zero: that's a different issue
274 16:31 <@leio> ok, now what?
275 16:32 <@lu_zero> ciaranm do you really use src_test on your systems?
276 16:32 <@Betelgeuse> Then they won't enable it when it's actually good to enable.
277 16:32 < ciaranm> lu_zero: yup
278 16:32 <+tanderson> lu_zero: I use it on my system, works fine
279 16:32 < ciaranm> lu_zero: as does everyone else running paludis
280 16:32 < dleverton_> lu_zero: in the same way that having cmake installed or using live ebuilds is a failure?
281 16:32 <@leio> lets not discuss src_test further please. It is not feasible to enable it by default this year
282 16:32 <@lu_zero> ciaranm and you do not have failures?
283 16:32 < ciaranm> lu_zero: i do. EAPI 3 would fix this.
284 16:32 <@lu_zero> dleverton_ ciaranm said there are so...
285 16:32 <@dev-zero> hehe, touché :)
286 16:33 <@lu_zero> ciaranm I don't see why
287 16:33 <@dberkholz> tanderson: i'm still waiting for you to tell us that you have a list of features with people who have questions etc
288 16:33 < ciaranm> lu_zero: if it were on for EAPI 3, any src_test failure that made it to the user would be a genuine failure. right now, half of test failures are just caused by lazy developers.
289 16:33 < dleverton_> lu_zero: ciaranm said there are what so what?
290 16:33 <@lu_zero> make test is used by upstream
291 16:33 < solar> ok well the real world includes things like cross compiles. So in the case of $CBUILD != $CHOST src_test() can and should not be run.
292 16:33 <@lu_zero> dleverton_ not just me apparently
293 16:33 <+tanderson> dberkholz: I can't write that up while the meeting's going on...too many people and too many proposals
294 16:33 < dleverton_> lu_zero: I can't understand a word you're saying now.
295 16:33 <@dev-zero> tanderson: how much off-time you need?
296 16:34 <+tanderson> dev-zero: ~5-10 minutes maybe
297 16:34 <@dberkholz> tanderson: now you understand the challenge when i was trying to be secretary too =)
298 16:34 < ciaranm> solar: so users who do cross-compiling can turn it off, along with all the other things they need to do to get cross-compiling to sort of work
299 16:34 <+tanderson> dberkholz: heh, indeed
300 16:34 -!- NeddySeagoon [n=NeddySea@gentoo/developer/NeddySeagoon] has joined #gentoo-council
301 16:34 <+tanderson> dberkholz: for now I can give you a list of things that need discussing so it can be done one at a time though
302 16:34 < solar> ciaranm: no reason to break stuff that works now for people
303 16:34 <@leio> ciaranm: for cross-compiling to work they just cross-compile, there's nothing else to do beside fix bugs...
304 16:35 <@dberkholz> tanderson: ok. all in one line, please, so it doesn't get broken up. then i'll start at the beginning
305 16:35 < solar> if people want and have the spare cpu and are the type to fix stuff. They can enable what they want.
306 16:35 < ciaranm> solar: it's an easy change for people who've already made large changes for cross-compiling to make one more small change
307 16:35 < solar> vs us being broken by default
308 16:35 < ciaranm> leio: ebuilds don't support it, though, except by fluke
309 16:35 <@leio> FEATURES=test on by default is completely unfeasible
310 16:35 < dleverton_> If it would really make people happy, portage could easily disable tests automatically in that case. PMS already doesn't cover cross compiling, so no need to mention it there.
311 16:35 <@leio> and as far as I'm concerned not a thing for an EAPI point
312 16:36 <@dertobi123> leio: fully-agreed
313 16:36 < ciaranm> leio: explain why please, avoiding any issue that has previously been shown to be false
314 16:36 < solar> our users are not an excuse for upstreams often buggy test suites. but that is a diff story.
315 16:36 <@dev-zero> ok, can we stop src_test discussion _now_ ?
316 16:36 <@leio> if a package manager wants to give users pleasures of uninteresting subtle failures due to bugs in the tests themselves, and increase the compile time from minutes to days for some stuff, that's their business
317 16:37 < ciaranm> leio: sorry, already debunked as being utter nonsense. please at least read the discussion we had.
318 16:37 <@leio> it's not an EAPI feature what a package manager or profiles considers a default FEATURES
319 16:37 < ciaranm> leio: also already debunked
320 16:37 < solar> I read it and in no way did you debunk it. you dismissed it
321 16:37 <@leio> I'm done with src_test for today.
322 16:37 <@Betelgeuse> stop
323 16:37 <@Betelgeuse> I don't see this going anywhere useful atm
324 16:38 <@dev-zero> me neither
325 16:38 <+tanderson> slot operator support(leio questions), default src_install(leio, open questions), disable-dependency-tracking(lu_zero), unpack fail on unknown types(dberkholz), doinclude( dberkholz ), doesed( dberkholz ), docompress(dev-zero+leio), doexample(dev-zero), limit values in $use to $iuse(leio), deprecate || ( foo? ( . ) . )(leio), dohard(leio), doinclude(leio), fast-install(leio)
326 16:38 <@Betelgeuse> There's nothing new here.
327 16:38 <@dertobi123> Betelgeuse: exactly
328 16:38 < ciaranm> it's not going to go anywhere useful until people read the frickin' discussion
329 16:38 <@dberkholz> aha, there we go
330 16:38 < solar> so drop it from the draft plz then
331 16:38 <@dev-zero> solar: will do
332 16:38 < ciaranm> solar: it's not in the draft
333 16:38 < solar> thanks. have a nice day *
334 16:38 <@dertobi123> tanderson: hrm, you missed my comment? ;)
335 16:38 <@dberkholz> the first thing on the list is slot ops. leio, you said you'll post to the list about that?
336 16:38 < solar> ciaranm: see the end of it. It was.
337 16:38 <@Betelgeuse> solar: read pms
338 16:38 < ciaranm> solar: no, it's in dev-zero's summary. it's not in the draft.
339 16:38 <+tanderson> dertobi123: I skimmed over, probably missed a few people's objections
340 16:39 < solar> Betelgeuse: PMS is the final spec. We are talking about a draft here at listed in the topic
341 16:39 <@leio> dberkholz: I guess. It would be nice to have explanations from an ebuild developer point of view for things like that point
342 16:39 <@dev-zero> list seems small enough to be discussed here, no?
343 16:39 < ciaranm> solar: uh. no. we're talking about a pms draft branch.
344 16:39 < solar> if you are putting things into before they are approved, then something is really wrong
345 16:39 < solar> ok
346 16:39 <@dertobi123> tanderson: anyways, my topics are listed
347 16:39 <@Betelgeuse> solar: The topic should have been made to point to PMS draft branch
348 16:40 <+tanderson> dertobi123: yeah, when we get to those you can just chip in that you also have questions
349 16:41 <@dev-zero> leio: from an ebuild developer pov: DEPEND="dev-lang/python" in a python package spans up to 4 slots
350 16:42 <@dev-zero> leio: DEPEND="dev-lang/python:=" will tell the pm that a package built using a specific python version needs that specific python version as long as that package is installed
351 16:42 <@leio> dev-zero: I think my point is to have such an explanation available to anyone evaluating the features. Your summary page or mailing list or whatever that goes beyond council members :)
352 16:42 < ciaranm> leio: *all* the changes will need user-facing documentation
353 16:42 <@dev-zero> yes, but creating them before actually having stuff implemented is a lot of work
354 16:43 <@leio> yeah, I don't mean all. Just things that are not well understood otherwise. Like this one.
355 16:43 <@dberkholz> leio: anythong you want to bring up now on default src_install?
356 16:43 <@leio> Ah! I think I found the right place in PMS. the hyperlinks on the bottom to up are going to weird places
357 16:44 <@dev-zero> leio: and the result? :)
358 16:44 <@leio> as for default src_install, I understand it covers what docs should be installed by default
359 16:44 -!- kickar [n=didkoddd@unaffiliated/kickar] has joined #gentoo-council
360 16:44 < ciaranm> the default src_install has "TODO: what goes here?"
361 16:45 <@leio> I think that this should be done by the maintainer always
362 16:45 <@dev-zero> leio: so, no default src_install?
363 16:45 <@dberkholz> yeah, there are many cases when the default GNU files are totally useless
364 16:45 < ciaranm> because some people think ebuilds shouldn't use DOCS="blah", despite writing lots of code themselves that does exactly that...
365 16:45 <@leio> this is in regards to the docs part of it
366 16:45 <@dev-zero> dberkholz: but for those a src_install is already written
367 16:45 <@leio> dodoc seems to already ignore files listed that are empty
368 16:46 <@leio> but in some cases NEWS says
369 16:46 <@leio> "See ChangeLog" and nothing else, crap like that doesn't need to get installed
370 16:46 <@leio> DOCS sounds good. Many eclasses do it.
371 16:46 <@dev-zero> dberkholz: and don't understand the argumentationn, sorry
372 16:46 < ciaranm> leio: in some cases, you override it. it's only a default.
373 16:47 * dertobi123 likes to see a useful default DOCS
374 16:47 <@leio> but I want the default src_install to handle the actual installation
375 16:47 <@leio> not decide for me what docs get installed
376 16:47 < ciaranm> then if the default's not good enough, don't use it
377 16:47 < ciaranm> the idea of defaults is to cover a lot of cases, not all cases
378 16:47 <@dertobi123> have a sane default, if you want to decide what docs get installed set DOCS
379 16:48 <@dev-zero> yes, you can still override it if you see that the docs installed by default are crap
380 16:48 <@leio> yeah, just please with a way that doesn't mean I can't call default in src_install for stuff like getting make install run by the default
381 16:49 <@leio> DOCS=""
382 16:49 <@leio> src_install() {
383 16:49 < ciaranm> leio: that'd need DOCS then, which some people object to
384 16:49 <@leio> some_extra_stuff
385 16:49 <@leio> default
386 16:49 <@leio> }
387 16:49 <@leio> sounds good
388 16:49 <@leio> right, so there's more discussion to do on list :(
389 16:49 < ciaranm> unfortunately the objection to DOCS is purely ideological
390 16:49 <@dev-zero> no, I don't think so
391 16:49 -!- spitf1r3 is now known as spitfire_
392 16:49 < ciaranm> which means voting on it and seeing which ideology is in the majority...
393 16:50 <@dev-zero> dberkholz: I remember you being the one objection DOCS, right?
394 16:50 <@dberkholz> yes
395 16:51 <@dberkholz> if you want docs defaults, i'd prefer a function argument instead
396 16:51 <@dev-zero> example?
397 16:52 <@dberkholz> i haven't thought about the interface
398 16:52 <@dberkholz> but you're all familiar with the concept of arguments to functions
399 16:52 <+tanderson> why not just vote on it?
400 16:53 <@dev-zero> yes, who objects a default src_install which calls "emake DESTDIR=${D} install ... ; dodoc ${DOCS}" ?
401 16:53 <@dev-zero> and from those who don't: who objects DOCS having a sane default like README NEWS etc. if not specified otherwise?
402 16:53 < solar> will it die if they don't exist?
403 16:54 <@dberkholz> i object to the whole philosophy of moving important parts of all ebuild functions (not global metadata) into variables
404 16:54 <@Betelgeuse> I want the contrary
405 16:54 <@Betelgeuse> In Java ebuilds having as much in variables has showed to be much better
406 16:54 <@dberkholz> i don't think it's useful enough with the changes in new EAPIs
407 16:54 < solar> and will the ebuild be forced to set DOCS="" ?
408 16:54 <@dberkholz> although when i wrote eclasses years ago, it was nice
409 16:54 < ulm> solar: some eclasses die if files from DOCS don't exist. so a general default may be problematic
410 16:55 < ciaranm> solar: the DOCS-based proposals i've seen only die if you explicitly set docs and stuff doesn't exist
411 16:55 < solar> seems sane
412 16:55 < ciaranm> solar: they silently ignore any defaults that don't exist
413 16:55 <@dev-zero> that seems useful
414 16:55 <@dev-zero> vote?
415 16:55 <@dberkholz> making people know all these variables associated with ebuild functions adds a whole new dimension to what they have to learn
416 16:56 <+tanderson> so people learn a bit more...big deal.
417 16:56 <+tanderson> Learning ebuilds isn't terribly difficult
418 16:56 < solar> tanderson: it will become harder over time as each eapi will have it's own rules.
419 16:56 < hwoarang> imho it's better to learn a couple of new ebuild than writting functions
420 16:56 <@dev-zero> nothing more than they have to learn when writing an ebuild using one of 13 or 14 eclasses which already recognise DOCS
421 16:56 <@dertobi123> and DOCS shouldn't be that hard to "learn" *cough*
422 16:56 < hwoarang> *s/ebuilds/variables
423 16:57 <@lu_zero> since is already in use
424 16:57 < ciaranm> solar: you only have to learn the EAPIs for things you're writing. which should just mean new EAPIs. older stuff you just look up.
425 16:57 <@lu_zero> have it standardized would be good
426 16:57 <@dev-zero> solar: there's usually only one eapi to learn, the most recent one
427 16:57 < solar> no
428 16:58 <@dberkholz> editing an ebuild that's e.g. part of kde or X or whatever is a whole different story from having *all* ebuilds doing something
429 16:58 <@dev-zero> dberkholz: not all, only those being EAPI=3 and from those only the ones with no src_install
430 16:58 < ciaranm> this isn't going to get decided by anything except a vote
431 16:58 <@dberkholz> you can learn levels of complexity in steps instead of needing it all at once for a basic ebuild
432 16:58 <@lu_zero> I'd just think if it would make us spare time or not
433 16:58 < ciaranm> both sides already know the arguments each way
434 16:58 <+tanderson> hint: if a substantial amount of eclasses do something, there might be a point to it
435 16:59 <@dev-zero> tanderson: my point
436 16:59 <@dev-zero> and I would like to see a vote
437 16:59 <@Betelgeuse> DOCS++
438 16:59 <@dev-zero> DOCS++
439 17:00 <@dberkholz> ----------------------
440 17:00 <@dertobi123> DOCS++
441 17:00 <@dberkholz> sorry, bad wifi.
442 17:00 <@lu_zero> too many - ^^
443 17:00 <+tanderson> unfortunately, we could have a tie vote...
444 17:00 <+tanderson> lu_zero: is that a DOCS-- for you?
445 17:00 <@leio> sorry, I got pre-occupied
446 17:00 <+tanderson> ok
447 17:01 <@lu_zero> tanderson I'm not so fond of having too many automagic vars
448 17:01 <@lu_zero> so I can agree on the idea of dberkholz
449 17:02 <@lu_zero> in itself shouldn't change much since common docs aren't that common (sadly)
450 17:02 <@Betelgeuse> lu_zero: woot?
451 17:02 <@Betelgeuse> lu_zero: I see it in almost every ebuild I write
452 17:03 <@lu_zero> Betelgeuse and you touch which kind of ebuilds?
453 17:03 <@dev-zero> lu_zero: and you can still set it manually
454 17:03 <@Betelgeuse> lu_zero: Java and autotools
455 17:03 <@dberkholz> we need to wrap it up
456 17:03 < ciaranm> need to finish the vote!
457 17:03 <+tanderson> is that a positive vote for DOCS? 3 ++, 2 --
458 17:03 <@dberkholz> looks like we're waiting on another vote from leio, and we'll catch cardoe later
459 17:04 <@dberkholz> if necessary
460 17:04 <@dberkholz> then we'll close up
461 17:04 <@leio> sorry, was on phone with landlord, gimme a minute please
462 17:05 <@lu_zero> Betelgeuse do they have a common intersection that is bigger than 2?
463 17:05 <@Betelgeuse> betelgeuse@pena /usr/portage $ find -name "*.ebuild" | xargs grep -l dodoc | wc -l
464 17:05 <@Betelgeuse> 12457
465 17:05 <@Betelgeuse> betelgeuse@pena /usr/portage $ find -name "*.ebuild" | xargs grep -vl dodoc | wc -l
466 17:05 <@Betelgeuse> 26204
467 17:05 <@Betelgeuse> and then there's the DOCS using stuff etc
468 17:05 <@dberkholz> leio: from 20:53 on will catch you up on this, if you aren't yet
469 17:06 <@leio> yeah, got markerline, reading
470 17:06 <@lu_zero> Betelgeuse so you are positive that would make us spare time
471 17:06 < solar> it sounds like you don't have to vote right now as cardoe is not here anyway
472 17:06 <@Betelgeuse> solar: if leio votes yes we have a majority any way
473 17:06 < ciaranm> doesn't really matter if leio votes in favour
474 17:06 <@dberkholz> you could do a grep for exactly how dodoc is called
475 17:06 <@dberkholz> indeed
476 17:07 <@leio> DOCS++
477 17:07 <@Betelgeuse> lu_zero: We used to have lots of stuff in functions in Java ebuidls. I migrated to using variables and it has been a lot better.
478 17:07 <@Betelgeuse> lu_zero: At least for me personally
479 17:07 <+tanderson> fine, DOCS is in
480 17:07 <@dberkholz> k, that's it for tonight
481 17:07 < solar> guys done?
482 17:07 <@dev-zero> yes
483 17:07 <@Betelgeuse> I will note that zac told me that GLEP 55 support is in Portage.
484 17:07 <@Betelgeuse> So I can finally do the numbers.
485 17:07 <@lu_zero> its 10.12 for me
486 17:08 <@dberkholz> meeting's over, tanderson please be sure to post the nice list of features with people blocking them