Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Lance Albertson <ramereth@g.o>
Subject: Re: Moving the updated apache and associated ebuilds back into package.mask
Date: Sat, 16 Apr 2005 01:10:31 -0500
On Sat, 2005-04-16 at 06:56 +0100, Elfyn McBratney wrote:

> As I'm sure many of you will know, the updated apache and associated ebuilds 
> (so-called apache refresh) have caused a number of problems since coming out 
> of package.mask and going into testing.  As a result, we have a number of 
> packages that simply do not function with the updated apache ebuilds, 
> rendering testing (on the apache side of things) broken.

Yes, this has gotten very annoying.

[snip]

> A number of people have suggested putting these updated ebuilds back into 
> package.mask, or lessening the impact of the upgrade from current stable 
> apache to the new ~arch apache.  So, I would like to solicit advice from the 
> developer community as to how we can rectify this.
> 
> The way I see it, we have three options:
>  - package.mask (downgrades for those early adopters)
>  - keep the same layout (/etc/apache2/conf, etc.) and wait until 2.2 is out to
>    change it
>  - have the newer apache ebuilds migrate from old-style to new-style config
>    (very hard to do, but possible)

I say at the very least package.mask it. Testing is supposed to be able
to compile and work, not half work and test. There's a reason we have a
package.mask, please use it! To me, it makes more sense to push these
changes in the next major release of apache (2.1/2.2). 2.0.x should be
kept as is since a lot of people are using that now and any change
midway through the release would cause a lot of havoc.

So far, most of the changes don't seem to be backward compatible with
each other. Right now you can't make a module that will work for either
variation of the layout without hacking it badly. To me, thats bad
especially since the new layout isn't in package.mask.

I just fear if we continue to push these changes on the current 2.0.x
line will continue to piss off a lot of people.

Cheers,

-- 
Lance Albertson <ramereth@g.o>
Gentoo Infrastructure | Operations Manager

---
Public GPG key:  <http://www.ramereth.net/lance.asc>
Key fingerprint: 0423 92F3 544A 1282 5AB1  4D07 416F A15D 27F4 B742

ramereth/irc.freenode.net
Attachment:
signature.asc (This is a digitally signed message part)
References:
Moving the updated apache and associated ebuilds back into package.mask
-- Elfyn McBratney
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Moving the updated apache and associated ebuilds back into package.mask
Next by thread:
Re: Moving the updated apache and associated ebuilds back into package.mask
Previous by date:
Moving the updated apache and associated ebuilds back into package.mask
Next by date:
Re: reply-to munging


Updated Oct 31, 2011

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.