Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Brian Harring <ferringb@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Thanks for your feedback
Date: Fri, 08 Apr 2005 10:13:57
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Thanks for your feedback by Adrian Lambeck
1 On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 07:28:31PM +0200, Adrian Lambeck wrote:
2 > Everybody thanks for the feedback to my GLEP(35).
3 > The discussion about it started on 2005/03/13.
4 >
5 > What I figured out so far is that some proposed changes are already covered in
6 > repoman.That is even better because some of the work is already done then.
7 > But how come that there are still trivial errors if half of the GLEP is
8 > covered and everybody is using repoman?
10 Define some, and the additional checks.
12 The listed checks in the glep are all handled by repoman, with the
13 sole exception of detecting stale SRC_URI; if I ever got off my ass
14 and dusted off pchecker and poked infra about running it occasionally,
15 that would be covered also.
17 re: broken shell scripts with invalid/missing commands, how are you
18 going to detect this? bash -n of the ebuild will not suffice for
19 syntax check errors, mainly due to the increasing (ab|)use of extglob
20 in ebuilds/eclasses...
22 Aside from that, the only errors I don't personally hold an ebuild
23 maintainer responsible for is either A) eclass dev goes and breaks
24 backwards compatibility (bad bad bad bad), or B) src_uri goes stale.
25 Everything else pretty much falls on the maintainers head imo.
28 Elaborate on cyclic depends also; there's nothing wrong with packages
29 directly depending on each other. Consider gcc, you can't build a gcc
30 without a compiler... cyclic depends right there...
31 (technically rdepend on a gcc version, but neh).
34 > I agree that changes on ebuilds should be done only by the developers. I will
35 > change this point in the GLEP.
36 > To post errors to a website and send some mails is just a form of
37 > implementation that I do not worry about right now. To use both and let dev`s
38 > choose from it would be a good thing though.
39 >
40 > Somebody mentioned that I am not aware of gentoo dev practices. That`s right.
41 > I tried to become aware of it but I could not find anything useful. Maybe I
42 > have not found the right documents or there are none i.e. I do not want to
43 > read portage source to figure out what is going on.
45 Err... while I berate the hell out of portage source on a daily basis
46 (it's my usual whipping boy), these checks you've referenced are all
47 repoman based, and repoman --help requires no code reading :)
50 > Maybe I should also add some motivation why to do this:
51 > There have been some talks about bringing Gentoo to the enterprise. For me
52 > this is not important and I do not care but this will never work if the
53 > quality is not checked at least to some degree.
54 >
55 > Also I do not like the mentality somebody put up that was like this: "I don`t
56 > mind fixing wrong URL`s - it is a matter of seconds."
57 > If you work for some customer (i.e. gentoo users) and they find simple errors
58 > that they might fix by themselves. What might they think ?
59 > Why not "kill" all these errors faster and take upon the hard things?
60 > I hate to open a root shell, fix the error, run the command again (find another
61 > error ?), start up firefox, login to bugs, check if somebody caught the
62 > error, file a bug .... hope you get the point.
64 I might be daft, but I'm not exactly hitting these errors...
65 The errors I *do* hit are more then simple stupid goof-ups people
66 should've caught, they're usual logic errors or an unforeseen
67 nastyness the packages build system busts out (sandbox violations
68 fex).
71 > It might be possible that i.e. for ONE week one developer is responsible for
72 > fixing ALL broken URL`s of all packages (does he really need to know about
73 > the ebuild`s content ?). Although I don`t know how many broken URL`s there
74 > might be ...
75 URI scanning is one thing, I'm just wondering what the rest of the
76 glep is actually specifying... Specifics are needed.
78 > Please do not get me wrong like: somebody from "outside" tries to change the
79 > system. I love Gentoo and I think it is a great system but there are things I
80 > would like to improve.
82 Change comes from inside and out, doesn't matter where from just as
83 long as the goal is improvement :)
85 That said, I still have qualms about the glep :)
86 ~brian
87 --
88 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list