Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Sergei Trofimovich <slyfox@g.o>
To: Michael 'veremitz' Everitt <gentoo@×××××××.xyz>
Cc: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Require full $P not just $PN on stable/keyword commit messages
Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2019 23:08:56
Message-Id: 20191101230831.77c56bed@sf
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Require full $P not just $PN on stable/keyword commit messages by Michael 'veremitz' Everitt
1 On Fri, 1 Nov 2019 19:59:35 +0000
2 Michael 'veremitz' Everitt <gentoo@×××××××.xyz> wrote:
4 > Hello,
5 >
6 > I've noticed a lot of stabilisation commit messages (and a few keywording
7 > ones too) simply state the package atom and not the relevant
8 > release/version. I find this a little meaningless, as unless this is the
9 > first time the package has ever been either stabilised or keyworded, it is
10 > reasonable to expect that there is/was some transition point for a package
11 > from when it first entered the Gentoo Repository.
12 >
13 > Therefore, it would be much /more/ useful to have the package-version
14 > tagged in the commit message, so that you could easily grep logs for when a
15 > given version of a package was stabilised, and/or keyworded. Granted, this
16 > is more of-use in a historical context compared to a present (future?!)
17 > one, but I would argue that it conveys more meaning -with- the version than
18 > without.
19 >
20 > Thoughts from outside peanut gallery?
22 A few points:
24 1. Given that you can't rely on that information today it won't be of much use in
25 future if it's already not precise.
27 If you want consistent keywording/stabilizing behaviour you might want to
28 propose/implement a tool that generates commits in a form everybody agrees.
29 Say, a specific form of repoman commit.
31 Today even keywording itself in not exactly fully automated process:
34 2. repoman was changed to disallow long enough subject lines from being committed.
36 As a result sometimes you can't just fit both package name and package version
37 into the fist line. Let alone full arch list and bug number.
39 Thus requiring ${P} is technically infeasible.
41 It would probably help to describe original problem in more detail being solved before
42 discussing of a solution.
44 If you need a precise solution for "when foo was stabilized" you have to look at the
45 ebuild's metadata as an authoritative source.
47 --
49 Sergei