1 |
On Tue, 22 Apr 2003 15:36:55 -0700 |
2 |
Robin H.Johnson <robbat2@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 05:07:22PM -0500, Brian Jackson wrote: |
5 |
> > Nobody showed an interest, but here it is anyway: |
6 |
> > http://www.mdrx.com/brian/portage-local.tar.bz2 |
7 |
> > There could be a lot more stuff there, and if anybody shows any |
8 |
> > interest, I will probably try to setup an rsync server for people to |
9 |
> > pull from instead of having to download and extract. |
10 |
> I think this is actually a great idea for now, as an extra testing |
11 |
> ground for some of the ebuilds. |
12 |
|
13 |
If it stays reasonably up to date with bugzilla this could be very |
14 |
useful. Personally I would not trust any ebuilds in it without manually |
15 |
checking them since, no offence to Brian, but I don't know him. However, |
16 |
checking a local synced copy of it would be much faster than checking |
17 |
bugzilla. |
18 |
|
19 |
> As a developer, I do occasionally merge a number of minor ebuilds that |
20 |
> I need myself and are just sitting in the bugzilla tree, and then I |
21 |
> keep an eye on them. |
22 |
> |
23 |
> The since most discougaging thing in any submitted ebuild is the lack |
24 |
> of an included ChangeLog. To anybody submitting an ebuild, use |
25 |
> skel.ChangeLog, and fill it out with the correct information. |
26 |
> Additionally, for many of your ebuilds, in your posting about the bug |
27 |
> specify what you did and why. It saves us a lot of trouble in |
28 |
> testing the ebuild. Also make sure that your ebuild installs ALL of |
29 |
> the documentation that is distributed with the source package. Take a |
30 |
> look at /usr/share/doc and see how comprehensive some packages are in |
31 |
> this regard. Don't forget the manpages either (a fairly common |
32 |
> mistake). |
33 |
|
34 |
Also, I would think that if you are submitting an ebuild for a new |
35 |
package including a summary of what it is and why it is useful (keep it |
36 |
short) since then a developer is more likely on seeing it to say, "Wow, |
37 |
I want that," and get it in to the tree. |
38 |
|
39 |
If an update to an existing ebuild for a new package version fixes a |
40 |
major problem, mention that briefly rather than just submitting it to |
41 |
bugzilla as a version bump. |
42 |
|
43 |
> If you have a question about how to do something in an ebuild, look at |
44 |
> other ebuilds or ask on this mailing list. |
45 |
> |
46 |
> If there is an ebuild that is totally ready to go out (eg I _could_ |
47 |
> just dump the files into a new directory and check them in. I don't |
48 |
> for security and QA reasons) of the box, it |
49 |
> greatly increases the chance that it will get into the tree quickly. |
50 |
> Very few submitted ebuilds come up to this level. I will admit that it |
51 |
> is a lot to ask for, but it really makes life as a developer much |
52 |
> easier. |
53 |
> |
54 |
> Personally, for any ebuild I am willing to pick up, I generally do the |
55 |
> following: |
56 |
> 0. read the submitted ebuild AND changelog |
57 |
> 1. grab the source tarball |
58 |
> 2. read the included documentation |
59 |
> 3. read the documentation on the web and other information I can find |
60 |
> about it |
61 |
> 4. re-read the included documentation |
62 |
> 5a. attempt to compile it only inside a sandbox enviroment |
63 |
> 5b. if problems from 5a, look at some of the source code/ebuild to |
64 |
> figure out why |
65 |
> 6. see what 'make install' or the other standard methods of install |
66 |
> WOULD install and compare that to the ebuild install instructions. |
67 |
> 7. install it on a testbed system and do some simplistic functionality |
68 |
> and security (trojaning) checks |
69 |
|
70 |
Check dependencies are correct? :-) |
71 |
|
72 |
> 8. install it on 3-5 other systems with widely varying configurations |
73 |
> to see if it installs cleanly in most cases. |
74 |
> 9. commit to CVS |
75 |
> |
76 |
> Generally this process is spread anywhere between 6 hours and a week |
77 |
> long, depending on package complexity and how busy I am with |
78 |
> work/school and my other open source work (I'm a developer on |
79 |
> phpMyAdmin). |
80 |
|
81 |
A lot of work is involved in properly checking changes submitted by a |
82 |
third party, something a lot of people who have not been involved in |
83 |
full change control systems often don't appreciate. The problem being |
84 |
that the person authorising the change has to understand it and be able |
85 |
to verify its correctness. I know because I've been the main person |
86 |
responsible for this on some large closed source projects where I |
87 |
personally knew all the other developers. |
88 |
|
89 |
> 19 times of of 20, if a submitted ebuild is more complex than |
90 |
> emake/einstall and doesn't include a changelog or some detailed |
91 |
> comments inside the ebuild as to what is being done, then I don't |
92 |
> touch it. |
93 |
|
94 |
Don't blame you. |
95 |
|
96 |
I've been reasonably happy because the few things I've submitted have |
97 |
gone through in a reasonable time frame when the work involved is |
98 |
considered. |
99 |
|
100 |
> Definetly having more developers/maintainers would help, but there are |
101 |
> many issues around this (as people have pointed out in the thread). |
102 |
> Debian's "solution" to many of the problems was a dedicated maintainer |
103 |
> for each package, and only a few packages per maintainer to keep |
104 |
> things managable, but that requires a LOT of maintiners/developers. |
105 |
> There are some changes under discussion for Gentoo on this presently, |
106 |
> but I won't say more now, as not to get people's hopes up for the |
107 |
> outcome as it could change a lot. |
108 |
|
109 |
Nice to hear it, although to be fair to the other developers there have |
110 |
been a few posts recently where the developers have said this so us |
111 |
users really should have got the point that this is being worked on. |
112 |
|
113 |
Once it is up and running I will probably try to spend more time |
114 |
watching the packages critical to me which I expect to be less commonly |
115 |
used. For now, time prohibits me from doing too much. |
116 |
-- |
117 |
Mark Gordon |
118 |
Paid to be a Geek & a Senior Software Developer |
119 |
Currently looking for a new job commutable from Slough, Berks, U.K. |
120 |
Although my email address says spamtrap, it is real and I read it. |
121 |
|
122 |
-- |
123 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |