Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] QA Team's role
Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:17:59
Message-Id: 20060228152910.7786271e@snowdrop.home
In Reply to: Re[2]: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] QA Team's role by Jakub Moc
1 On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 16:08:05 +0100 Jakub Moc <jakub@g.o> wrote:
2 | 28.2.2006, 15:39:40, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
3 | > On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 10:49:13 +0100 Jakub Moc <jakub@g.o>
4 | > wrote:
5 | > | No, that's not a policy document, ebuild policy is documented
6 | > | here:
7 | > |
8 | > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?style=printable&part=3&chap=1
9 |
10 | > No, the whole thing is policy.
11 |
12 | No, it isn't.
13
14 'Fraid it is. Everything in the devrel handbook that isn't explicitly
15 marked as a guideline is policy.
16
17 | And silently sticking parts of unofficial gentoo
18 | devmanual into official Gentoo docs, and then silently turning them
19 | into a "policy" enforced under QA disguise is a bad very practice,
20 | and pretending that this has been in the mentioned _howto_ (not
21 | policy) for a long time as just plain silly. Since you haven't
22 | answered the question in one of my previous emails at all, let me ask
23 | again:
24 |
25 | When and where has been the following change discussed and who
26 | approved that?
27 |
28 | http://www.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewcvs.cgi/xml/htdocs/proj/en/devrel/handbook/hb-guide-ebuild.xml?r1=1.25&r2=1.26&root=gentoo
29
30 Wouldn't know. That was nothing to do with me. I just wrote the
31 original text (or actually, that might not even have been me). It
32 finding its way into the policy docs was devrel's doing.
33
34 | > | Moreover, the cited howto is wrong, since it will break
35 | > | built_with_use checks
36 |
37 | > No, that's a separate issue.
38 |
39 | No, it isn't. If you want something to have as a policy, it needs to
40 | be error-free, reasonably applicable and not doing more harm than if
41 | it isn't applied at all. And implementing such stuff requires a
42 | proper discussion, considering the consequences and some sort of
43 | consent among affected developers. (Also, that howto example is less
44 | than fortunate/clear, like some user noted in Bug 124401).
45
46 built_with_use isn't a question of conflicting USE flags. It's a
47 separate question of dependency resolution, and in this situation it
48 *can't* be solved using the method that's been standard for four years
49 or more.
50
51 | > | The howto also doesn't apply to cases like
52 | > | recode vs. mysql, because that's a completely different
53 | > | functionality, you can't exactly choose which one is better on
54 | > | behalf of the user.
55 |
56 | > No, it does apply.
57 |
58 | No, it doesn't, you can't reasonably favour one of two completely
59 | different functionalities based on some automagic
60 | assumption/developer discretion. That doesn't benefit users in any
61 | way and just produces unexpected results (hey, I explicitely enabled
62 | "recode" use flag and php compiled without, the ebuild is broken,
63 | fix0r it!)
64
65 By all means warn the user. There's nothing in policy disallowing that.
66
67 | No, noone should enforce a policy that
68 |
69 | - doesn't exist (see above)
70
71 The whole devrel handbook is policy, except where otherwise noted. See
72 Mike's reply.
73
74 | - hasn't been discussed properly and approved (see above)
75
76 Nothing in the devrel handbook was discussed properly or approved.
77
78 | - it's consequences haven't been considered wrt whether its benefits
79 | overweight the negatives and whether is useful at all.
80
81 This one doesn't rule out the policy item in question.
82
83 --
84 Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (Wearer of the shiny hat)
85 Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org
86 Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re[2]: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] QA Team's role Jakub Moc <jakub@g.o>