1 |
Hi, |
2 |
|
3 |
after a week of real-life work, I was able to catch up with the whole |
4 |
mail mess, thus doing a dump of thoughts here. |
5 |
|
6 |
Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>: |
7 |
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 21:48:48 +0100 |
8 |
> Christian Faulhammer <fauli@g.o> wrote: |
9 |
> > in commit 6a281c0bc6b951c0885c8787fa5c353a4f4e3d0d I disabled |
10 |
> > kdebuild-1 by default. My proposal now is to drop the KDEBUILD |
11 |
> > conditionals as a whole as the overlay has gone anyway, where it was |
12 |
> > used. We can add a sentence in the introduction or wherever which |
13 |
> > says something along the lines like "kdebuild-1 was the first EAPI |
14 |
> > like format that supported extended features added to official EAPIs |
15 |
> > later on and was heavily tested in the official Gentoo KDE overlay". |
16 |
> > This would ease maintenance a bit. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> As we've already discussed: |
19 |
> |
20 |
> * Stop committing things that aren't typo fixes without posting them |
21 |
> to this list for review. |
22 |
|
23 |
They are still administrative things reflecting a council decision and |
24 |
setting the repo to official document generation by default. |
25 |
The whole "get rid of detailled kdebuild-1 description" has nothing to |
26 |
do with denying that kdebuild-1 was one of the first steps towards |
27 |
EAPI in Gentoo, but it eases the maintenance burden. LaTeX code is not |
28 |
easier to read when a lot of conditionals are applied. Put a warning |
29 |
in Paludis when an kdebuild-1 is detected and I also support your news |
30 |
item here. |
31 |
|
32 |
> * Don't commit the EAPI 3 / 4 changes until the Council are done |
33 |
> changing things, and until we have a patch for the new definition of |
34 |
> EAPI 3. We don't have a definition for the new EAPI 3 yet. We also |
35 |
> don't have approved summaries of any of the meetings where these |
36 |
> things happened. Any changes done now are wasted effort. |
37 |
|
38 |
As I spoke with council members and people attending it before doing |
39 |
the commits, I think I know about the intentions. What Zac or anyone |
40 |
else is doing is not to be intermixed with my actions as we acted |
41 |
independently from each other. So let's stick to one topic and I will |
42 |
justify my commits now: |
43 |
|
44 |
Disable kdebuild-1 by default: We had the discussion several times and |
45 |
your only argument now is that there might be consumers of an |
46 |
never-approved EAPI out there. |
47 |
Update bash version: This reflects a council decision and two people |
48 |
had input from you and others about the patch. I discussed it with |
49 |
Thomas Anderson on #-dev and we agreed on a wording which I committed. |
50 |
3 to 4 move: Purely administrative and has been worked on by two people |
51 |
(ulm and myself). |
52 |
Cheat note: The commit comment is wrong and is not what I intended to |
53 |
say in the blob itself. So I will revert that piece of code as it was |
54 |
a shoot from the hip and not thought through. |
55 |
|
56 |
Anyway, yes, reviewing is necessary, but if essential changes from my |
57 |
point of view are blocked or stonewalled through that means, I may |
58 |
choose to take action.eas |
59 |
|
60 |
> * Don't mess with kdebuild until you're sure that no-one has any |
61 |
> kdebuild packages installed. |
62 |
|
63 |
Don't be too academic. To be sure is not possible. And please don't |
64 |
speak about bridge construction and failure possibilites when you don't |
65 |
know about how an engineering process works. |
66 |
|
67 |
> * When the heck did "use the highest EAPI" become policy? |
68 |
|
69 |
Maybe I mixed up some discussion in -dev with some policy agreement. |
70 |
|
71 |
V-Li |
72 |
|
73 |
-- |
74 |
Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project |
75 |
<URL:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode |
76 |
|
77 |
<URL:http://gentoo.faulhammer.org/> |