| 1 |
On 20:24 Fri 14 Dec , Andrey G. Grozin wrote: |
| 2 |
> Today, I committed to the main tree |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> asdf-2.26 |
| 5 |
> gentoo-init-1.0 |
| 6 |
> sbcl-1.1.2 |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> ... |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> So, if anybody has objections against moving these things to the main |
| 11 |
> tree, please, say so now, while this stuff is hard-masked. If I'll hear no |
| 12 |
> objections after some period, I'll unmask it. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
Hello Mr. Grozin, |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
today you removed the hard masks. However, I think that we should p.mask |
| 18 |
them again, temporarily, for the following reasons: |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
1) the asdf-2 ebuild is not well tested. It fails on make doc if |
| 21 |
texi2pdf is not available, also needs sbcl at the moment (try to build |
| 22 |
it without sbcl on the system, it will fail). And these, just for the |
| 23 |
start. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
2) we don't know yet the impact asdf-2 will cause in other packages in |
| 26 |
the tree. For example clisp is pulled by xindy pulled by texlive (a |
| 27 |
package all gentoo latex guys have in their system). |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
3) we don't know yet the impact this update will cause in the overlay. |
| 30 |
And there are still people using it. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
4) I don't like at all, having these random bash functions in the |
| 33 |
ebuilds instead of an eclass. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
It's better to work together in the next days and push in the tree the |
| 36 |
common-lisp-3 eclass, and also do more testing. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
I'm considering p.masking again these packages in the next hours. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Merry Christmas, |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
-- |
| 43 |
Panagiotis Christopoulos ( pchrist ) |
| 44 |
( Gentoo Lisp Project ) |
Archives