| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 07/17/2013 11:28 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote: |
| 5 |
> On 07/17/2013 05:17 PM, Chris Reffett wrote: |
| 6 |
>> On 07/17/2013 04:57 PM, hasufell wrote: |
| 7 |
>>> I know there was an announcement about the upcoming change to |
| 8 |
>>> cmake-utils.eclass, however... it is not enough to give a |
| 9 |
>>> deadline without caring if people actually fixed it by then. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
>>> By doing that you risk breaking stable packages which is not |
| 12 |
>>> trivial. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
>>> You _must_ do a tinderbox run, test that stuff in an overlay or |
| 15 |
>>> whatever. You are responsible for ALL reverse deps. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
>>> The way it was done... was not appropriate. Please be more |
| 18 |
>>> careful next time. There are still incoming bugs about broken |
| 19 |
>>> base_src_* calls. (see the tracker) |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
>> I discussed this with hasufell on IRC, but I'll lay out the |
| 23 |
>> response on the list too. Yes, this was my fault. We (KDE team) |
| 24 |
>> tested in our overlay, but none of the packages there use the |
| 25 |
>> base_src_* calls, which is why it didn't come up in testing, and |
| 26 |
>> I did not realize that there were packages that did rely on the |
| 27 |
>> implicit base inherit to call base_src_* directly. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> ...and that is why it isn't permitted to directly use an eclass |
| 30 |
> that you don't inherit. While I agree testing could (should) have |
| 31 |
> been better, the fact that people ignore the rules for writing |
| 32 |
> ebuilds shouldn't entirely fall on the KDE team. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
It doesn't matter in the slightest whos fault it is or who should be |
| 36 |
blamed. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
It is about maintaining stability for the user. Especially when it |
| 39 |
comes to stable ebuilds. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
That means the methods for eclass changes must be more thoroughly. |
| 42 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 43 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) |
| 44 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJR5w3sAAoJEFpvPKfnPDWzPLEH/jXlCgVFOFT2lj3OPxjE8E7o |
| 47 |
6IFEPMFUwlEvWHGnCXG2Go8f9UEUxinvzfE6x0K8IT2NrffBbTjDvM1n/aJmNMkf |
| 48 |
89pLjCqsra6iM4WJhIGxoXq/lIJcoJ3dJkxMS6kz7U0VWeH2wTAY0pQ/qIlJ3e30 |
| 49 |
XHcXhQZP9LzD1GEA43v0bO9FRYuh/zjJpzNVGHsj3jUmijQsglYyMSN8YGS4vBbe |
| 50 |
y5gCHZcsjMOWkRlzUsCd0qn3EF6WgUzs9Ty7MreRDoI4pfvxcVu0PrhcrciLOCzx |
| 51 |
2OHylKFU6btOJpUrjYJbUss+53jfPWLvo8AThz/I6ClItJxGjNsrDukpdtXXH6A= |
| 52 |
=Tc2N |
| 53 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives