Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Council meeting 2015-04-14: call for agenda items

[Andrew Savchenko]

Hi,

On Tue, 7 Apr 2015 00:05:50 +0200 Michał Górny wrote:
[...]
> > I sad nowhere I'm going to do it. We are discussing opportunities
> > to fix current sore situation. Threatening people with bans just
> > for their thoughts reminds me of George Orwell's Thought Police...
>
> You are discussing something that has already been proven impossible
> like you're trying to make it possible via introducing more noise.
>
> > > Let me remind you: once you break dependency tree on *ANY* stable
> > > architecture, repoman won't let you commit. Travis turns red. All pull
> > > requests are marked as broken.
> >
> > Repoman, travis and other QA tools can be fixed if policy changes.
> > That's not a problem. Right now we have an all-green travis, but
> > outdated, broken and likely insecure packages it tree marked as
> > stable. That is the problem we're trying to discuss here.
>
> How can they be fixed? By making them ignore dependency breakages? What
> is the use of QA tools if you disable the most important QA check just
> to push your some really stupid idea through.
>
> > And as I see this problem has no good solution, so one less painful
> > for users should be chosen. If this will require a QA policy
> > update, then it should be done.
>
> And thanks to this 'less painful' solution people lately had a real
> hard time due to app-eselect/ move. Sure, it looks good on a first
> glance but then you get into the fine details and everything falls
> apart. Of course, some people simply don't care about the fine details
> at all.

I'm not claiming that my proposal is perfect or even good enough;
please propose something better, but consider all side-effects
carefully: you'll see that broken stable deptree is not a worse
possible scenario. My main point is that things should not be left
as they are right now.

Best regards,
Andrew Savchenko