1 |
On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 09:29:59AM -0800, Matt Turner wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 11:09 PM Joonas Niilola <juippis@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> > |
4 |
> > On 9.3.2022 23.00, Matt Turner wrote: |
5 |
> > > I'd like to deprecate and ultimately remove repoman. I believe that |
6 |
> > > dev-util/pkgcheck and pkgcommit (from app-portage/mgorny-dev-scripts) |
7 |
> > > are far superior replacements, and it makes sense to have people using |
8 |
> > > the same tool and seeing the same warnings as in the CI. |
9 |
> > > |
10 |
> > > Are there any useful checks or behaviors of repoman that are missing |
11 |
> > > from pkgcheck and pkgcommit? |
12 |
> > > |
13 |
> > > Thanks, |
14 |
> > > Matt |
15 |
> > > |
16 |
> > |
17 |
> > I still fail to see the "why" in here. Repoman is better than pure 'git |
18 |
> > commit' that I know some people still like to use, and as long as it's |
19 |
> > kept maintained. |
20 |
> |
21 |
> repoman is inferior to other tooling mentioned. The other tooling is |
22 |
> actually run in CI. Developers should get the same warnings locally as |
23 |
> in CI. Restated another way: I'm tired of telling people to stop using |
24 |
> repoman or "pkgcheck would have caught that". |
25 |
|
26 |
I am going to nit-pick here, but pkgcheck pulls in pkgcore still. As far |
27 |
asI know, pkgcore was meant to be a portage-like package manager, but it |
28 |
isn't maintained. So, can we break that dependency before we make |
29 |
pkgcheck the official tool for qa checks? I would rather not have |
30 |
pkgcore landing on everyone's systems unless it is usable. If I am wrong |
31 |
about pkgcore, please correct me and I'll be quiet, but if not let's |
32 |
make pkgcheck independent from it before we deprecate repoman. |
33 |
|
34 |
Thanks, |
35 |
|
36 |
William |