Re: [gentoo-dev] Deprecating repoman

[Sam James]

> On 11 Mar 2022, at 19:39, Joshua Kinard <kumba@g.o> wrote:
>
> On 3/11/2022 03:54, Mart Raudsepp wrote:> Ühel kenal päeval, N, 10.03.2022
> kell 18:18, kirjutas Joshua Kinard:
>>> I stick to the officially-published method of checking and committing
>>> changes:
>>> https://devmanual.gentoo.org/ebuild-maintenance/git/index.html
>>>
>>> The two tools highlighted there for the bulk of the work is repoman
>>> and pkgdev.  repoman is cited twelve times, pkgdev is cited six times.
>>> pkgcheck is mentioned once.  pkgcommit has no mentions.
>>>
>>> From that, one should not be faulted for assuming that repoman is the
>>> more important tool, if not preferred tool, with pkgdev coming in
>>> second place. pkgcheck comes across as entirely optional and even
>>> seems equivalent to 'repoman full', and how would one know that
>>> pkgcommit even exists?
>>
>> I believe the very purpose of this thread is to have a consensus/pre-
>> announcement before actually editing the official documentation as part
>> of the process of deprecating repoman.
>
> I feel that the documentation should have had more mentions of these newer
> tools as their adoption by other developers accelerated.  Documentation
> doesn't have to have a fixed point in time when it fully changes over.  It
> can change organically, like almost everything else in the project.

Well, I've done that. I've been adding pkgcheck and pkgdev to the devmanual
over time, and to the wiki.

> [snip]

>> Also the benefit of using pkgcheck is to actually be able to make the
>> same checks that CI would do before you push, so you can amend your
>> commits to fix issues before they hit the server and CI and break the
>> tree. pkgcheck is so fast that it can do full tree checks in a
>> reasonable time (repoman would take days on a radiator mips when you go
>> outside single package), and I believe has features to have it check all
>> your commits that haven't been pushed yet at once, checking only what it
>> can to not be too slow to not use (so you don't need to run the check
>> with each commit but for all of them once you commit - and if issues,
>> again, git interactive rebase).
>
> Speed is really not a big issue for me.  I run repoman from my amd64 dev
> box, and it's like, maybe 10-13 seconds at most during 'repoman full'?  And
> my MIPS systems, while not the slowest of slow of that arch, they do teach
> you patience over the years.
>
> The other bits you mention about pkgcheck do sound useful, though.  But I am
> a stickler for official documentation, because my risk aversion level when
> committing to a public repo that can affect hundreds of thousands of users
> is *extremely* high.  When I first signed up as a dev and we had the

It is already mentioned in the devmanual, but we can add it in more places
if you specify which.