From: "Michał Górny" <mgorny@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-qa@lists.gentoo.org
Cc: qa@gentoo.org
Subject: [gentoo-qa] Games team policies
Date: Sun, 12 Oct 2014 13:37:56 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141012133756.1904e62b@pomiot.lan> (raw)
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3154 bytes --]
Hello, QA.
Since it seems that we are unable to get a proper meeting anytime soon,
I would like to discuss the agenda items of my interest via the mailing
list. For a first thread, I would like to discuss games team policies.
The specific policies were proposed for Council meeting [1, pts. 3-5],
yet the Council deferred the topic to QA as a more appropriate body
[2, 'Games team policies']:
| - There is consensus amongst council members that specific policies
| (e.g., games group, /usr/games hierarchy, and games.eclass) should
| be settled by the QA team.
The relevant requests are [from 1]:
| 3. the use of group 'games' to control access to games can be
| deprecated and needs not to be enforced,
|
| 4. the /usr/games hierarchy (esp. Gentoo-specific /usr/games/lib*)
| and other locations listed in games.eclass are entirely optional. Using
| upstream install locations is recommended,
|
| 5. the use of games.eclass is entirely optional. Preferably, the eclass
| would be deprecated since it mostly serves the purpose of enforcing
| the rules objected in (3) and (4).
And the relevant part of rationale:
| 3. The attempt of limiting access to games through use of 'games' group
| is unjustified and unprofessional. It caused multiple issues
| in the past, including repeatedly ignored security issue from 2006 [3]
| and multiple uses of RESTRICT=userpriv [4].
|
| I recall hearing that game access ought to be restricted because
| the games are more likely to be of worse quality and the sysadmin wants
| limit the access to them to the trusted users. Yet at the same time
| the restriction is causing game ebuilds to run game tools with root
| privileges since otherwise the portage user is unable to access them.
|
| 4. This specific hierarchy is specified by FHS as optional and is
| not beneficial to users (esp. considering the objection in (3)).
| In some cases, it forces a lot of patching on packages using
| non-autoconf build systems that would otherwise be installed in /usr
| hierarchy, with no visible benefit. Additionally, this causes Gentoo to
| diverge from upstream and therefore from other distributions.
|
| 5. Most of the code in the games.eclass is meant to redefine phase
| functions and provide wrappers over standard PMS helpers. The sole
| purpose of all that is to force the ownership and permissions (objected
| in (3)), and /usr/games hierarchy (objected in (4)). If Council agrees
| on abolishing those requirements, the eclass becomes mostly a no-op
| (or equivalent to base.eclass which it is inheriting).
|
| Moreover, the games team currently requires the eclass to be always
| inherited last. Since it redefines multiple phase functions, this
| sometimes results in ebuilds needing to restore all 'original' phase
| functions.
What are your thoughts?
[1]:http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/3919
[2]:http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20140812-summary.txt
[3]:https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=125902
[4]:https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=516576
--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 949 bytes --]
reply other threads:[~2014-10-12 11:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20141012133756.1904e62b@pomiot.lan \
--to=mgorny@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-qa@lists.gentoo.org \
--cc=qa@gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox