[gentoo-catalyst] Catalyst 2.0.9 tagged but no ebuild in Gentoo?

[gentoo-catalyst] Catalyst 2.0.9 tagged but no ebuild in Gentoo?

[Sebastian Pipping]

Hi there,


it seems there is a tag

  CATALYST-2.0.9

in Git but no trace of an ebuild in Gentoo.  If there is purpose here,
have you considered adding a masked ebuild, instead?  What is your
motivation for the current approach?

Best,



Sebastian

Re: [gentoo-catalyst] Catalyst 2.0.9 tagged but no ebuild in Gentoo?

[Matt Turner]

On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 7:36 PM, Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
>
> it seems there is a tag
>
>  CATALYST-2.0.9
>
> in Git but no trace of an ebuild in Gentoo.  If there is purpose here,
> have you considered adding a masked ebuild, instead?  What is your
> motivation for the current approach?

Weird. That must be a mistake.

Re: [gentoo-catalyst] Catalyst 2.0.9 tagged but no ebuild in Gentoo?

[Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 24-06-2012 23:36, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
> Hi there,
> 
> 
> it seems there is a tag
> 
> CATALYST-2.0.9
> 
> in Git but no trace of an ebuild in Gentoo.  If there is purpose 
> here, have you considered adding a masked ebuild, instead?  What
> is your motivation for the current approach?

This isn't a "bug". I've tagged the release to test a few things
related to the move from make.conf and make.profile from /etc to
/etc/portage. I'll add the ebuild to the tree in a few days.

> Best,
> 
> 
> 
> Sebastian
> 

- -- 
Regards,

Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org
Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections / RelEng


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
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=bKme
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-catalyst] Catalyst 2.0.9 tagged but no ebuild in Gentoo?

[Sebastian Pipping]

Hello Jorge,


On 06/25/2012 02:17 PM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
>> it seems there is a tag
> 
>> CATALYST-2.0.9
> 
>> in Git but no trace of an ebuild in Gentoo.  If there is purpose
>>  here, have you considered adding a masked ebuild, instead?
>> What is your motivation for the current approach?
> 
> This isn't a "bug". I've tagged the release to test a few things 
> related to the move from make.conf and make.profile from /etc to 
> /etc/portage. I'll add the ebuild to the tree in a few days.

It's been two weeks.  Please add an ebuild for 2.0.9 to give
interested users of catalyst the chance to check it out.  If you feel
it's too "hot" for mass consumption please mask it one way
(package.mask) or another (KEYWORDS="").

For the future I propose we really release releases (i.e. git tag,
tarball and and ebuild) or to make no release tag if if there is no
release.  For plain testing a git-describe-like label and a snapshot
should be sufficient to my understanding:

  # git describe --tags | sed 's|^CATALYST-||'
  2.0.9-262-gb3a0ffb

Thanks!

Best,



Sebastian

Re: [gentoo-catalyst] Catalyst 2.0.9 tagged but no ebuild in Gentoo?

[Matt Turner]

On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 12:59 PM, Sebastian Pipping <sping@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Hello Jorge,
>
>
> On 06/25/2012 02:17 PM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
>>> it seems there is a tag
>>
>>> CATALYST-2.0.9
>>
>>> in Git but no trace of an ebuild in Gentoo.  If there is purpose
>>>  here, have you considered adding a masked ebuild, instead?
>>> What is your motivation for the current approach?
>>
>> This isn't a "bug". I've tagged the release to test a few things
>> related to the move from make.conf and make.profile from /etc to
>> /etc/portage. I'll add the ebuild to the tree in a few days.
>
> It's been two weeks.  Please add an ebuild for 2.0.9 to give
> interested users of catalyst the chance to check it out.  If you feel
> it's too "hot" for mass consumption please mask it one way
> (package.mask) or another (KEYWORDS="").
>
> For the future I propose we really release releases (i.e. git tag,
> tarball and and ebuild) or to make no release tag if if there is no
> release.

I completely agree with all of this.