Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto" <jmbsvicetto@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [ [Bug 322157] [mail-filter/procmail] new ebuild + autocreate maildirs]
Date: Sun, 11 Jul 2010 16:54:22
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [ [Bug 322157] [mail-filter/procmail] new ebuild + autocreate maildirs] by Nirbheek Chauhan
Hash: SHA1


thanks for writing such a well thought-out and comprehensive reply to
Enrico. I agree with all the points you raised.

On 11-07-2010 10:28, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 11, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Enrico Weigelt <weigelt@×××××.de> wrote: >> * Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek@g.o> schrieb: >>> I don't see how these various distros can be made to agree with >>> each other and I certainly can't see them using a common tarball >>> source. >> >> Thats not even necessary. They just should use the infrastructure, >> as described in my paper. So everyone can easily set up automatic >> notifications, cherry-pick, etc, etc. >> > > Why should we? I am *yet* to see a single reason for us to change how > we work other than "please use this since I've been putting a lot of > effort into it".
Enrico, just because you decided to "offer" some service, it in no way "forces us" to accept it.
>>> On a technical level, it's got serious security, trust, and >>> redundancy problems. >> >> Git makes that very easy ;-p >> > > No, it does not. The security problems come because you are the single > point of failure. The trust problems come because we have no reason to > trust you. The redundancy problems come because if your hosting goes > down or you lose interest, we're left high and dry. Git has nothing to > do with any of this.
These 3 issues are in my view the most important issues regarding your proposal and I agree with Nirbheek's reply. With your proposal, you're expecting us (distro maintainers) to put our trust and our users safety in you and your service - what made you think we would or should do it? Besides, what significant gain would we have to justify trusting your service?
>>> It is extremely important that distros collaborate in some form >>> when it comes to patches that *can* be shared, >> >> If we're doing a good job (my generic fixes instead of distro- >> specfic dirty hacks) about 99% can be shared ;-p >> > > I'd advise you to take a look at the sort of patching Ubuntu/Debian > does, and then revisit that figure. You'll find it more along the > lines of 30%. > > >>> A practical solution to the problem of patch sharing is to >>> have a website with a search interface for upstream source >>> tarballs, which can display all the patches that various >>> distros apply, as well as a download link for the patchsets >>> (hotlinked to the distro files where possible). >> >> Too complicated, and actually would not help me a single bit. > > Help *you*? I thought this was about helping the distros. If your > proposal is not about making our work easier, please don't waste our > time. > >>> Distro packagers are much more comfortable with downloading >>> patchsets from a foreign source than complete tarballs. >> >> man git-format-patch ;-p >> > > So why don't you submit that to bugzilla?
Please don't assume replies are based solely on people not knowing the tools (git in this case).
>>> I know you have spent a lot of time on this already, but please >>> understand it from where we stand. We're short on manpower, and >>> there's no real benefits of shifting our tarball source; OTOH there >>> are major disadvantages too unless we pitch in with manpower >>> ourselves. And honestly speaking, that manpower is better spent making >>> stuff work locally. >> >> Well, Gentoo is short of manpower ? hmm, perhaps some should think >> about why so many folks are resigning and so few fresh coming in >> (at least according to this lists traffic) ;-O
This type of argument when you're trying to convince others to use your service is in the least a disservice to your purpose.
> I'm beginning to think that you're not taking my honest advice very seriously. > >>> Please consider the "patch-website" idea above. We definitely need >>> someone to code it up, gather the source-package to distro patches >>> mappings, and advertise it. >> >> Actually, I once had somehing in that area, called "comprehensive >> source database", but unfurtinately it got lost in an disk array >> crash a few years ago, and I didnt find the time to rewrite it yet. >> >> Meanwhile I dont need it anymore, since I gave up maintaining >> plaintext patches in favour of git. And that makes my daily works >> _much_ easier. >> > > You don't need to maintain **anything** manually if you code the > website properly. That's the whole point. You get major benefits with > minimal long-term work which can be done by a single person in their > free time. > > This job is easily automated to simply aggregate links to patches > which all the distros manually publish themselves. For Gentoo, it's > the ebuilds; for Debian/Ubuntu, they actually publish the diffs[1]; > Fedora keeps its patches in a common CVS repo[2], etc etc. Once the > website is up and running, maintenance is minimal, and can be done by > a single person looking at it in their free time. > > 1. See packages.(debian|ubuntu).(org|com) > 2. >
- -- Regards, Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.15 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJMOfchAAoJEC8ZTXQF1qEPoCcQAKlDi9d7GgZPK00kq+6lRZRF +JW5kTvOoOyu75X9nglzxKuJCWqOFMV6T1X5CvKOr/5XOJbdmAdrd7flSHxixlsI DZi+62u3at7rq26pPOpt5wCNdR+PVSvGp0J8Y+X1AtB8UpYk6P/3Zjqk1ZyS9HSp zqX4TCnEXOoQd6uNueiPh3qF7hr5F1dZSsqEaO99A9CVPwkGzLZE2/yyYDPB2ZU9 KqFdd+MyBpdgCOW02QjZAymKfn1C9sDjifWflj48mAhJEgRSMrAmf3/m8dzEy5qm T/qNGTgehN1cNgIREm4BBiwIwgYoYDUAr9plurgTDuJ6S8uSOUnk++8EF07uUnjo qTKR6Xxf86YN0zjwEgQhzfY8FfVvD26DJVg3woJSzrDM+ZGXfiCBjzX+tOpcRq54 vNE8+egMrce3V0ypI6iLc3fvY7pyOyRUuuwMT4vzau9fb7EL3YcGJvtXT+3ozm+n bXpp+wK8BJy7QRa3O+A6d9GbuLM8u+rsRw85Oc/j59rJ/5e+QWqOvg1su7p6bG4D rL26CxnRUMOAM9VtL2zfVa4rZTqsD1KVaT5RQ+u989P4FHJc+NcmLtE1cvV42iR7 GEl3fHinq37XiSug2YwTIO8pnc8O0jYibQw3IDmHlNdxFCZ3lgsC/Ir7mIUjkzgh 3Gcc1L+1LNeYh+fF4wNN =Lpc6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----