> Arthur Zamarin hat am 30.05.2023 18:35 CEST
> geschrieben:
>
>
> Currently the best solution *per package* is to speak with upstream, to
> add a CI workflow which create a source tarball which includes `vendor`
> dir. This is the best way, and I'm doing that for multiple upstream of
> some
On 30/05/2023 18:35, Arthur Zamarin wrote:
My solution is as such:
1. Undeprecate EGO_SUM in eclass
2. Forbid it's usage in ::gentoo (done by pkgcheck, error level, will
fail CI and as such we can see the misuse). Overlays are allowed.
3. Maintainer starts talks with upstreams to add release wor
On Tue, May 30, 2023 at 21:30:49 +0500, Anna (cybertailor) Vyalkova wrote:
> On 2023-05-30 17:52, Florian Schmaus wrote:
> > To prevent harm from Gentoo, we should reach an agreement that everyone
> > can live with. To achieve a consensus, and since I can not rule out that
> > I missed a post tha
On 30/05/2023 18.52, Florian Schmaus wrote:
>
> I am thankful that the council considered my request to vote on the
> topic. However, the council decided not to vote on this in its last
> session and to return the issue to the mailing lists.
>
> Some see the requirement of some limitations as nec
On 2023-05-30 17:52, Florian Schmaus wrote:
> To prevent harm from Gentoo, we should reach an agreement that everyone
> can live with. To achieve a consensus, and since I can not rule out that
> I missed a post that includes specific numbers, please share your ideas
> on how EGO_SUM could be rei
On 24/04/2023 18.11, Florian Schmaus wrote:
I like to ask the Gentoo council to vote on whether EGO_SUM should be
reinstated ("un-deprecated") or not.
I am thankful that the council considered my request to vote on the
topic. However, the council decided not to vote on this in its last
sessio
