Gentoo Archives: gentoo-pms

From: Christian Faulhammer <fauli@g.o>
To: gentoo-pms@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-pms] kdebuild-1 conditionales
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 22:50:53
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-pms] kdebuild-1 conditionales by Ciaran McCreesh
1 Hi,
3 after a week of real-life work, I was able to catch up with the whole
4 mail mess, thus doing a dump of thoughts here.
6 Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>:
7 > On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 21:48:48 +0100
8 > Christian Faulhammer <fauli@g.o> wrote:
9 > > in commit 6a281c0bc6b951c0885c8787fa5c353a4f4e3d0d I disabled
10 > > kdebuild-1 by default. My proposal now is to drop the KDEBUILD
11 > > conditionals as a whole as the overlay has gone anyway, where it was
12 > > used. We can add a sentence in the introduction or wherever which
13 > > says something along the lines like "kdebuild-1 was the first EAPI
14 > > like format that supported extended features added to official EAPIs
15 > > later on and was heavily tested in the official Gentoo KDE overlay".
16 > > This would ease maintenance a bit.
17 >
18 > As we've already discussed:
19 >
20 > * Stop committing things that aren't typo fixes without posting them
21 > to this list for review.
23 They are still administrative things reflecting a council decision and
24 setting the repo to official document generation by default.
25 The whole "get rid of detailled kdebuild-1 description" has nothing to
26 do with denying that kdebuild-1 was one of the first steps towards
27 EAPI in Gentoo, but it eases the maintenance burden. LaTeX code is not
28 easier to read when a lot of conditionals are applied. Put a warning
29 in Paludis when an kdebuild-1 is detected and I also support your news
30 item here.
32 > * Don't commit the EAPI 3 / 4 changes until the Council are done
33 > changing things, and until we have a patch for the new definition of
34 > EAPI 3. We don't have a definition for the new EAPI 3 yet. We also
35 > don't have approved summaries of any of the meetings where these
36 > things happened. Any changes done now are wasted effort.
38 As I spoke with council members and people attending it before doing
39 the commits, I think I know about the intentions. What Zac or anyone
40 else is doing is not to be intermixed with my actions as we acted
41 independently from each other. So let's stick to one topic and I will
42 justify my commits now:
44 Disable kdebuild-1 by default: We had the discussion several times and
45 your only argument now is that there might be consumers of an
46 never-approved EAPI out there.
47 Update bash version: This reflects a council decision and two people
48 had input from you and others about the patch. I discussed it with
49 Thomas Anderson on #-dev and we agreed on a wording which I committed.
50 3 to 4 move: Purely administrative and has been worked on by two people
51 (ulm and myself).
52 Cheat note: The commit comment is wrong and is not what I intended to
53 say in the blob itself. So I will revert that piece of code as it was
54 a shoot from the hip and not thought through.
56 Anyway, yes, reviewing is necessary, but if essential changes from my
57 point of view are blocked or stonewalled through that means, I may
58 choose to take action.eas
60 > * Don't mess with kdebuild until you're sure that no-one has any
61 > kdebuild packages installed.
63 Don't be too academic. To be sure is not possible. And please don't
64 speak about bridge construction and failure possibilites when you don't
65 know about how an engineering process works.
67 > * When the heck did "use the highest EAPI" become policy?
69 Maybe I mixed up some discussion in -dev with some policy agreement.
71 V-Li
73 --
74 Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project
75 <URL:>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode
77 <URL:>


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


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-pms] kdebuild-1 conditionales Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com>