| 1 |
Hi David, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
On Tue, May 23, 2017 at 09:11:03AM +0200, David Seifert wrote: |
| 4 |
> Dear users of the sci overlay, |
| 5 |
> we've recently rearranged the git setup. The current sci setup is now |
| 6 |
> exactly like the main tree setup, namely: |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> 1. The authoritative repo is the one hosted by infra |
| 9 |
> (git://anongit.gentoo.org/proj/sci.git) |
| 10 |
> 2. All commits to the sci repo will be synced over to Github |
| 11 |
> automatically, in ONE DIRECTION only. This means all the dual HEAD |
| 12 |
> merging is obsolete now. |
| 13 |
> 3. The Github repo is now meant as a (friendly) interface to potential |
| 14 |
> contributors. |
| 15 |
> 4. As a new QA policy, merge commits in the overlay are banned now. The |
| 16 |
> sci overlay has much lower contention than the main repository, such |
| 17 |
> that you can realistically always avoid merge commits, even for large |
| 18 |
> batches of commits. This will require you to rebase your commits on top |
| 19 |
> of remote: |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> git pull --rebase=preserve |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> I will likely further tighten the QA standards of the repository, due |
| 24 |
> to a history of poor COMMITMSGs and other QA violations. This is |
| 25 |
> supposed to be a testing ground for the main repo, where plans are to |
| 26 |
> also introduce such QA measures. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Furthermore, I am considering requiring full GPG-signed commits for the |
| 29 |
> overlay, and for this I would like to get some input. I believe this |
| 30 |
> prepares contributors for eventually joining Gentoo. For low-volume |
| 31 |
> contributors not wanting to join, we can always merge pull requests |
| 32 |
> from Github. Ideas? Are you opposed to this? |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
I welcome all these changes. If we can help in educating people on the |
| 35 |
more tricky things, like signing with a GPG key, even better. I have |
| 36 |
some ebuilds I use personally now that I will try to add in the next |
| 37 |
few days to the overlay. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
That said, once we reach good enough quality of ebuilds in the overlay, |
| 40 |
we should start just moving them to the main tree. Gentoo is used by |
| 41 |
quite a few physicists (myself included) and other scientists, so |
| 42 |
eliminating the need for an extra overlay would be nice. I remember |
| 43 |
having problems with things like blas/atlas and eselect due to |
| 44 |
divergences with the main tree in not so distant past. Also, using |
| 45 |
overlays with prefix is not always a seamless experience. |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
I'm not saying the overlay should go away, but just be a staging area |
| 48 |
for scientific packages before they land on the main tree. What are your |
| 49 |
thoughts on this? |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
Cheers, |
| 52 |
—Guilherme |
Archives