Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: hasufell <hasufell@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Docker 1.0.0 masked for no known reason?
Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2014 12:36:42
Message-Id: 53B0084D.1080107@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Docker 1.0.0 masked for no known reason? by Rich Freeman
1 Rich Freeman:
2 > On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 8:12 AM, hasufell <hasufell@g.o> wrote:
3 >> Also, those masks are rarely short-term in practice, because well, see
4 >> this thread.
5 >
6 > Is there any evidence to support this statement? You only notice
7 > masks when they're a problem, and these kinds of masks tend to be a
8 > problem only if they're long-term.
9 >
10
11 Yeah, I'v been collecting and analyzing data over the years to come up
12 with the results just now ;)
13
14 I was just giving my own perception of things.
15
16
17 >> Developer overlays are widely used. So yes, ~arch users will be testing
18 >> it, probably even arch users. It also limits the potential damage for
19 >> the user, because he can very easily toss out the crap by just
20 >> removing/masking the whole overlay instead of going on adventure reading
21 >> broken portage output.
22 >>
23 >
24 > If I want three users following a bug to test something, it is far
25 > easier to tell them to just unmask it than to tell them to go install
26 > my developer overlay. Also, right now you can't easily pull in just
27 > one package from an overlay, so they get the benefit of installing
28 > whatever else is in my overlay.
29 >
30
31 'layman -a overlay && flaggie foo +~amd64 && emerge -av1 foo' can be
32 easier than figuring out masks that maybe even go across multiple
33 dependencies (need to remind anyone of multilib masks and how screwed
34 anyone was/is who mixes only a few ~arch packages with arch?).
35
36 Also, pulling in just one package from an overlay is almost the same as
37 unmasking a tree ebuild.
38
39 > And as I stated previously creating an overlay for one package is
40 > unnecessary work.
41 >
42
43 For single packages, you use your developer overlay. For more complex
44 things like multilib, you create a separate one.
45
46 > I'm not saying that we should be leaving stuff in the tree for six
47 > months for "testing" - just that there are cases where it can be
48 > convenient to have a short-term mask.
49
50 This is still too vague for me. If it's expected to be short-term, then
51 it can as well just land in ~arch.
52
53 If it's not expected to be short-term, then I cannot follow the argument.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Docker 1.0.0 masked for no known reason? Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>