Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: George Shapovalov <george@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Ebuild Janitor Project
Date: Sun, 11 May 2003 21:24:30
Message-Id: 200305111424.04718.george@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Ebuild Janitor Project by David Nielsen
1 Hey guys.
2
3 As I was reading through last few day's postings I realised, there is certain
4 important part missing in the picture of streamlined/distributed ebuild
5 processing system mentioned earlier. That is of the place where users could
6 actively interact and discuss the ebuilds thay submitted and get the fixes
7 rolling as discussion brings our shortcomings... Looks like this project
8 nicely fits to this role ;).
9 Well, there is this:
10 http://forums.gentoo.org/viewforum.php?f=8
11 so I kept forums at the back of my mind, but looks like the forums you setup
12 are trying to keep more to the point. So this is not really a duplication
13 after all...
14
15 Now, on the integration issue, which is quite essential, as was already
16 mentioned. The way I see it, distributed ebuild processing requires:
17 1. some central depository with automated submission system doing at least
18 some basic checks (multiple access/stability levels are already in portage,
19 but that might need some further ratification)
20 2. strong voting/feedback system (think gentoo-stable/stats), looped back to
21 ebuild level adjutment (some automatic some manual).
22 3.(new!) the way for users to be getting feedback on their ebuilds and be able
23 to discuss related stuf with each other. Apparently best done in user-land,
24 by the project such as the one you initiated. Should really do a lot in terms
25 of increasing overall quality of submitted ebuilds.
26
27 Ok, this by no means should be considered as detailed to any level or even
28 setting any course of action, just trying to throw the overall structure into
29 the mix, so that it gets registered and remembered later when need arises :),
30 especially since there was a question where this project could fit ;).
31 For those who did not follow related discussion few weeks ago, some more
32 details on pp 1 and 2 are available in #1523, however outdated by all the
33 changes that happened since and pending redesign which should follow soon
34 after the internal reorganisation (mentioned in recent GWN) completion.
35
36 George
37
38
39 On Sunday 11 May 2003 14:01, David Nielsen wrote:
40 > Okay, our guidelines clearly state that when a fixed ebuild has been
41 > confirmed by two other people as working, we submit it to bugzilla. All
42 > the ebuild janitors do is make sure that the ebuilds use the USE flags
43 > to the maximum of their potential, and of course generally clean them up
44 > as there's a lot of stuff in some older ebuilds that is no longer valid.
45 > Your mail clearly showed that you had not read those guidelines..
46 > - Lovechild
47
48
49 --
50 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list