1 |
Hi all, |
2 |
|
3 |
I also think that the split in kde-testing and kde-crazy is a good |
4 |
idea, still. You can't avoid confusion though when a branch is |
5 |
stabilizing and its ebuilds are moving from kde-crazy to kde-testing |
6 |
(until they finally reach the main portage tree). It will be the same |
7 |
again at the transition from 4.2 to 4.3, from 4.3 to 4.4, ... |
8 |
|
9 |
The only way to prevent the confusion (of both users, and more |
10 |
importantly, devs) would be to organize them differently. Let each KDE |
11 |
development branch have its own overlay, e.g. kde42 and kde43. At the |
12 |
beginning of its life span, that overlay would be highly experimental, |
13 |
just as kde-crazy. During upstream development, both code and |
14 |
eclasses/ebuilds stabilize simultaneously, and at beta time changes |
15 |
would be minimal already. That's the time when ebuilds usually move |
16 |
out from kde-crazy to kde-testing and questions such as the one above |
17 |
emerge, but in the suggested structure, they would remain in their |
18 |
overlay at least until the branch hits portage, and eventually, the |
19 |
overlay would be removed and a new one created, as KDE development |
20 |
goes on. |
21 |
|
22 |
2008/12/26 Markos Chandras <hwoarang@×××××××××××.gr>: |
23 |
> On Friday 26 December 2008 03:54:54 Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: |
24 |
>> Theo Chatzimichos wrote: |
25 |
>> > Hello |
26 |
>> |
27 |
>> Hi |
28 |
>> |
29 |
>> > we are having a small issue here concerning the two overlays. Since the |
30 |
>> > eclasses, the live ebuilds and the snapshots are in a good shape now (in |
31 |
>> > fact eclasses are about to hit the tree), kde-crazy offers nothing but |
32 |
>> > confusion now. There's no reason to have to sync eclasses between |
33 |
>> > overlays every time, it's boring, time consuming and maintaining two |
34 |
>> > overlays in a single system is very difficult (should i say impossible?) |
35 |
>> > I can't test eclasses for the co-existence of snapshots and live in a |
36 |
>> > single system at the moment for example. Furthermore, even devs don't |
37 |
>> > know where is the right place to commit :) Initially i thought it would |
38 |
>> > be better to have in a separate overlay all the ebuilds that are going to |
39 |
>> > hit tree, but now i don't. I'd like to hear everybody's opinion, |
40 |
>> > especially jmbsvicetto's since (iirc) he proposed the kde-crazy overlay |
41 |
>> |
42 |
>> I still think there's a place and purpose for both overlays. |
43 |
> I agree with this |
44 |
>> Let me |
45 |
>> recall you the reasons for them: |
46 |
>> |
47 |
>> * kde-testing - the purpose of this overlay is to be a stage for |
48 |
>> ebuilds going into the tree and for having "reasonably" stable ebuilds |
49 |
>> for packages that we don't want to put in the tree. For instance, the |
50 |
>> bumps for 4.1.4 and 4.1.86/90 should be done here. |
51 |
>> * kde-crazy - overlay for hosting the live ebuilds and for doing the |
52 |
>> really "wacky" experiments (features for long term). As an example, work |
53 |
>> for 4.3 snapshots should start here. |
54 |
>> |
55 |
> |
56 |
> I my mind , kde-testing is for kinda "stable" packages while kde-crazy is for |
57 |
> experiments. For example , i keep chaning qt-4.5.0_beta ebuilds. I would feel |
58 |
> really guilty if those packages were in kde-testing overlay cause I would not |
59 |
> feel comfortable chaning them. |
60 |
> See, kde-craze is like a kde/qt playgroun for development and testing while |
61 |
> kde-testing offers kde packages that are consider *highly* testing to be in |
62 |
> portage. |
63 |
>> I think most of your problems are happening because having eclasses in |
64 |
>> any of the overlays makes things harder. The reason any eclass should be |
65 |
>> added to the kde-testing overlay is to get it final testing before |
66 |
>> moving into the tree. Any major change on eclasses should start on |
67 |
>> kde-crazy. |
68 |
>> |
69 |
>> > Regards, |
70 |
>> > Theodore |
71 |
> |
72 |
> Markos |
73 |
> |
74 |
> -- |
75 |
> Markos Chandras (hwoarang) |
76 |
> |
77 |
> |