Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Alex Alexander <wired@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in media-libs/mlt: ChangeLog mlt-0.5.4-r1.ebuild
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 2010 16:16:21
Message-Id: 20100814161626.GB1363@linuxized.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in media-libs/mlt: ChangeLog mlt-0.5.4-r1.ebuild by Markos Chandras
1 On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 04:47:39PM +0300, Markos Chandras wrote:
2 > On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 04:10:13PM +0300, Alex Alexander wrote:
3 > > On Sat, Aug 14, 2010 at 03:50:53PM +0300, Markos Chandras wrote:
4 > > > > - If you are not in cc of the gentoo bug nor in the herd alias, please cc
5 > > > > yourself on the bug.
6 > > > > - Please close the bugs, even the dupes (and apply previous point to the dupes
7 > > > > too).
8 > > > > - That way you'll be able to quickly fix (apparently, I didn't check) obvious
9 > > > > mistakes [1].
10 > > > > - You'll have to do a rev. bump for *FLAGS respect, please also check if you
11 > > > > can avoid it by doing a version bump instead.
12 > > > Well not always. If something is on ~testing then I don't think I should
13 > > > "spam" the tree with revbumps. Stable users are my first priority so
14 > >
15 > > Stable may be more critical, but we support ~testing as well. How do you
16 > > expect your changes to be tested before landing on stable if you don't
17 > > revbump the packages, allowing them to reach our users?
18 > I expect arch testers to do a pretty good testing before they mark them
19 > stable. Seems like I am the only one who fixes such issues without revbump.
20 > Strange, cvs log must be lying...
21 >
22 > Now lets see
23 >
24 > http://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/ebuild-revisions/index.html
25 >
26 > "Ebuilds should have their -rX incremented whenever a change is made which will
27 > make a **substantial** difference to what gets installed by the package — by
28 > substantial, we generally mean "something for which many users would want to
29 > upgrade". This is usually for bugfixes."
30 >
31 > Seems like it is up to maintainer's discretion to decide what it is
32 > substantial change and what it is not. Many users wont be directly affected from my changes. It is not like not
33 > respect CXX, CXXFLAGS after all.
34 >
35 > "Simple compile fixes do not warrant a revision bump; this is because they do
36 > not affect the installed package for users who already managed to compile it.
37 > Small documentation fixes are also usually not grounds for a new revision."
38 >
39 > So you want me to force everyone to update the package just to respect the
40 > LDFLAGS. Why, since until recently, nobody gave a crap about this kind of QA
41 > issues?
42 >
43 >
44 > Please provide a patch for devmanual to make it more clear. If it is
45 > already clear maybe I am that stupid after all.
46 >
47 > In any case, I will keep doing what I do because you didn't convince me so far
48 > that my changes need a revbump. If arch testers fail to do proper testing
49 > thats really *REALLY* not my fault. Testing is testing and I can't do a
50 > revbump for every little piece of shit I fix everytime.
51
52 Does respecting LDFLAGS change the installed files in any way? yes.
53 Will users benefit from your change if you don't revbump? No.
54
55 I think that chain of logic is enough to warrant a revbump and it is
56 covered by the devmanual since the change affects the installed package.
57
58 It's merely a cp, why are you making such a fuss about it? You're doing
59 a good job already, we're just pointing out ways to make it even better
60
61 :)
62
63 BTW, archs do the final testing, but much testing is done by the users
64 themselves, who report the bugs that get fixed before the packages get a
65 STABLEREQ bug ;)
66
67 > >
68 > > Please, don't skip revbumps to avoid "tree spamming", thats why we have
69 > > revbumps in the first place ;)
70 > >
71 > > > unless something is on stable branch, I fix it as it is. I don't want to
72 > > > version bump anything because I don't want to mess with anyones
73 > > > packages. I only do QA fixing. If you have problem touching your
74 > > > packages just say it
75 > > > >
76 > > > > A.
77 > > > >
78 > > > > [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=332523
79 > > >
80 > > > --
81 > > > Markos Chandras (hwoarang)
82 > > > Gentoo Linux Developer
83 > > > Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org
84 > >
85 > > --
86 > > Alex Alexander -=- wired
87 > > Gentoo Linux Developer -=- Council / Qt / KDE / more
88 > > www.linuxized.com
89 >
90 >
91 >
92 > --
93 > Markos Chandras (hwoarang)
94 > Gentoo Linux Developer
95 > Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org
96 > Key ID: 441AC410
97 > Key FP: AAD0 8591 E3CD 445D 6411 3477 F7F7 1E8E 441A C410
98
99
100
101 --
102 Alex Alexander -=- wired
103 Gentoo Linux Developer -=- Council / Qt / KDE / more
104 www.linuxized.com

Replies