On Sat, 14 Jun 2008 10:38:18 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Marius Mauch wrote:
> > Ignoring possible semantic issues for the moment,
>
> Please point them so I could fix them properly ^^
For example all the ordering issues pointed out by others in this
thread. Also the whole 't
Marius Mauch wrote:
Ignoring possible semantic issues for the moment,
Please point them so I could fix them properly ^^
I'd be against this simply because it would require the PM to be aware
of the current revision of the repository and to transform it into a
integer value (trivial for SVN, n
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:05:01 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > looks like every nominee wants the council to be more technical so I
> > have a few technical questions for you:
> >
> > 1. GLEP54
>
> Just for fun I took some of the ideas a
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 13:32:47 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The revision has to be stored inside the generated ebuild so all you
> need to have is:
>
> - a way to know the revision you are checking out
> - a way to store such revision withing the ebuild
- a way of doing this che
Brian Harring wrote:
Custom repository is how I intended to implement this; the upshot of
the version translation is that the resultant vdb version is managable
by any PM, regardless if they support -live, which 'generated' the
ebuild.
Presuming svn python bindings aren't as sucky as I recall
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 04:14:38 -0700
Brian Harring <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> One other thing that needs discussion imo, is how such a scheme would
> work for non integer based revnos- git for example, which is reliant
> on a hash (just the hash, afaik).
Neither Luca's proposal nor -scm even att
On Fri, Jun 13, 2008 at 10:43:39AM +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Anyway pkgcore and portage devs, I'd like your opinion on this point.
Custom repository is how I intended to implement this; the upshot of
the version translation is that the resultant vdb version is managable
by any PM, regardless
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 10:43:39 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 21:40:28 +0200
> > Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> * ordering for _pre is wrong.
> >> hm?
> >
> > foo-0.26-live would become foo-0.26_pre1, which would be < 0.2
On 13 Jun 2008, at 10:43, Luca Barbato wrote:
* What's the filename for "live ebuild for SVN trunk/"? What about
foo-${version inside trunk}.live?
And when trunk is unversioned?
Upstream has an issue, still you know which is the version they aim.
Wrong. Your GLEP has an issue because it is
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 21:40:28 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* ordering for _pre is wrong.
hm?
foo-0.26-live would become foo-0.26_pre1, which would be < 0.26. This
is clearly wrong.
No, it is correct and what you want. Upstream is aiming for 0.26, once
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 21:40:28 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > * ordering for _pre is wrong.
>
> hm?
foo-0.26-live would become foo-0.26_pre1, which would be < 0.26. This
is clearly wrong.
> > * How are you planning to handle reinstalls? Should installing world
> > always reinsta
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:05:01 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just for fun I took some of the ideas about alternative management of
the issue and specified the features it makes it worth changing
(better management and automated snapshot generation from the l
On Thu, 12 Jun 2008 11:05:01 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Just for fun I took some of the ideas about alternative management of
> the issue and specified the features it makes it worth changing
> (better management and automated snapshot generation from the live
> ebuild).
>
>
Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
Hello,
looks like every nominee wants the council to be more technical so I
have a few technical questions for you:
1. GLEP54
Just for fun I took some of the ideas about alternative management of
the issue and specified the features it makes it worth changing (better
On Mon, 9 Jun 2008, Joe Peterson wrote:
Technical reasons to avoid the filename:
1) Increase of [needless] complexity in filenames/extensions (and only one
example of the impact is that searching for ebuild files becomes less
straightforward), when things like SLOT, EAPI, etc., etc., seem t
Donnie Berkholz wrote:
> On 11:12 Sun 08 Jun , Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
>> looks like every nominee wants the council to be more technical so I
>> have a few technical questions for you:
>>
>> 1. GLEP54
>> 2. GLEP55
>
> I don't have any particular objections to these, besides the vague
> aest
On 11:12 Sun 08 Jun , Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> Hello,
>
> looks like every nominee wants the council to be more technical so I
> have a few technical questions for you:
>
> 1. GLEP54
> 2. GLEP55
I don't have any particular objections to these, besides the vague
aesthetic one of having EAP
On 13:41 Sun 08 Jun , Alex Howells wrote:
> I would like to see Council move towards a more compressed meeting
> format -- people presenting arguments need to work out their stuff
> before bringing it up in the meeting, and to allow for quick
> turn-around of decisions I'd suggest fortnightly m
Luca Barbato wrote:
Thomas Anderson wrote:
As Fabian said it really isn't a matter of "We like XML better than
LaTeX!"
It's not those people's prerogative.
Problems like having homogeneous documentation aren't that small.
See the devmanual. It uses completely different XML markup. It is XML
Thomas Anderson wrote:
I personally have had no problems reading and/or understanding PMS, and
I've had to reference a fair bit of it. I'd like to hear exactly who has
problems with what sections and how to fix that.
As Fabian said it really isn't a matter of "We like XML better than LaTeX!"
On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 12:27:52 +0100
Ciaran McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The current council has raised "never actually deciding anything" to
> an art form.
Barking up the wrong (portage) tree again?
Kindest regards,
JeR
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 14:18 +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Thomas Anderson wrote:
> > As Fabian said it really isn't a matter of "We like XML better than LaTeX!"
> > It's not those people's prerogative.
>
> Problems like having homogeneous documentation aren't that small.
>
> > The people who wrot
On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 01:26:53PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 14:18:01 +0200
> Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > The people who wrote PMS should be able to make the decision
> > > for themselves(as they will be maintaining it) as to what language
> > > to use.
>
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 14:18:01 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The people who wrote PMS should be able to make the decision
> > for themselves(as they will be maintaining it) as to what language
> > to use.
>
> The main point being using latex prevents people from modify it.
Are y
On 9 Jun 2008, at 14:18, Luca Barbato wrote:
The people who wrote PMS should be able to make the decision
for themselves(as they will be maintaining it) as to what language to
use.
The main point being using latex prevents people from modify it.
Your opinion.
You don't *have* to read PMS i
Thomas Anderson wrote:
As Fabian said it really isn't a matter of "We like XML better than LaTeX!"
It's not those people's prerogative.
Problems like having homogeneous documentation aren't that small.
The people who wrote PMS should be able to make the decision
for themselves(as they will be
On Mon, Jun 09, 2008 at 01:00:52PM +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 09-06-2008 11:49:35 +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
> > Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> >> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:50:11 +0200
> >> Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't
>
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 12:56:33 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 03:28:03 -0700
> > Josh Saddler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Global variables must only contain invariant values (see >> link="#metadata-invariance">link). If a glob
On 09-06-2008 11:49:35 +0200, Luca Barbato wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:50:11 +0200
>> Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't
anyone who thinks so bothered to provide details?
>>> - rewrite it as
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 03:28:03 -0700
Josh Saddler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Global variables must only contain invariant values (see link="#metadata-invariance">link). If a global variable's value
is invariant, it may have the value that would be generated at any
given po
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 03:28:03 -0700
Josh Saddler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Global variables must only contain invariant values (see link="#metadata-invariance">link). If a global variable's value
> is invariant, it may have the value that would be generated at any
> given point in the build s
On Monday 09 June 2008 11:28:03 Josh Saddler wrote:
> Let's change all that hideous, barely readable multiple brace/bracket
> abuse into something more human-readable, shall we?
Please explain why angle brackets are readable but braces aren't.
>
> bunch o'neat code
>
Wow, you mean we just type
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 11:49:35 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:50:11 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't
anyone who thinks so bothered to p
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 11:49:35 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:50:11 +0200
> > Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>> So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't
> >>> anyone who thinks so bothered to provide
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:50:11 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't
anyone who thinks so bothered to provide details?
- rewrite it as an rfc using a markup among xmlrfc, docbook, guidexml.
What techni
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:50:11 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't
> > anyone who thinks so bothered to provide details?
>
> - rewrite it as an rfc using a markup among xmlrfc, docbook, guidexml.
What technical reason is t
On 9 Jun 2008, at 10:50, Luca Barbato wrote:
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
I'm afraid you are mixing up emails from this thread. I got
complaints about how wrongly the PMS is written, e.g. academic paper
markup vs plain text, natural language used to specify syntax
while a
grammar notation like EB
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
I'm afraid you are mixing up emails from this thread. I got
complaints about how wrongly the PMS is written, e.g. academic paper
markup vs plain text, natural language used to specify syntax while a
grammar notation like EBNF would be better suited, when I asked
people why
On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 10:28:57 +0200
"Denis Dupeyron" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:58:40 +0200
> > Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Usually in this category you put everybody that disag
On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 09:26:00 +0100
Roy Marples <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 09 June 2008 09:06:24 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't
> > anyone who thinks so bothered to provide details?
>
> Probably because you have such a long histo
On Mon, Jun 9, 2008 at 10:06 AM, Ciaran McCreesh
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:58:40 +0200
> Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Usually in this category you put everybody that disagrees with you,
>> no matter the topic.
>
> And what does that tell you about the average
On Monday 09 June 2008 09:06:24 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> So how, specifically, is PMS "wrongly written", and why hasn't anyone
> who thinks so bothered to provide details?
Probably because you have such a long history of saying "it's broken" without
providing any details. Even when asked you some
On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 09:58:40 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > Anyone thinking that has a very limited understanding of how things
> > work.
>
> Usually in this category you put everybody that disagrees with you,
> no matter the topic.
And what does that t
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
Anyone thinking that has a very limited understanding of how things
work.
Usually in this category you put everybody that disagrees with you, no
matter the topic.
Let's face it, there hasn't been any correct criticism, and any
complaints have been from people who don'
On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 19:54:46 +0200
Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 3. Most wanted changes in future EAPIs
>
> Somebody is thinking the PMS and the EAPI definition as it is are
> wrong and should be replaced since they aren't useful for their
> purpose.
Anyone thinking that has a very
2008/6/8 Luca Barbato <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
>
>> 1. GLEP54
>> 2. GLEP55
>
> None of them got discussion back in -dev, the glep hadn't been changed as
> requested during the unnecessary long discussion in the meeting.
>
> Looks like the overall consensus is that those aren'
Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
1. GLEP54
2. GLEP55
None of them got discussion back in -dev, the glep hadn't been changed
as requested during the unnecessary long discussion in the meeting.
Looks like the overall consensus is that those aren't useful as they are
and thus either you fix them, dis
On Sun, 2008-06-08 at 13:41 +0100, Alex Howells wrote:
[snip]
> I often don't agree with him, but can't help but respect the work he does.
>
> I would like to see Council move towards a more compressed meeting
> format -- people presenting arguments need to work out their stuff
> before bringing i
n Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 6:11 PM, Alex Howells <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/6/8 Nirbheek Chauhan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> You have raised "flame and don't actually contribute anything useful"
>> to an art form.
>
> Whilst I'd agree Ciaran flames with the best of them, and trolls with
> the worst,
2008/6/8 Nirbheek Chauhan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> You have raised "flame and don't actually contribute anything useful"
> to an art form.
Whilst I'd agree Ciaran flames with the best of them, and trolls with
the worst, you simply cannot contend he never contributed anything to
the project and despi
Please stay on topic, we don't want another useless flamewar.
--
Sergio D. Rodríguez Inclan
-
http://sergio.dicyt-usfx.edu.bo | srinclan @ dicyt-usfx.edu.bo Cel: 79302244
Linux User #446728 --> http://counter.
On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 17:05:06 +0530
"Nirbheek Chauhan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The current council has raised "never actually deciding anything"
> > to an art form.
>
> You have raised "flame and don't actually contribute anything useful"
> to an art form.
If you seriously think I haven't co
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 4:57 PM, Ciaran McCreesh
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 07:22:06 -0400
> Richard Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> For the most part I think the current council has embraced this,
>> although most of the discussion on lists do not involve council
>> memb
On Sun, 08 Jun 2008 07:22:06 -0400
Richard Freeman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> For the most part I think the current council has embraced this,
> although most of the discussion on lists do not involve council
> members themselves (though they clearly follow the discussions).
The current council
Denis Dupeyron wrote:
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 12:45 PM, Roy Bamford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Before the flames start lets consider the Package Manager Specification
(PMS) as an example. For this (very black and white) illustration,
forget the council discussions to date and imagine that represe
On Sun, Jun 8, 2008 at 12:45 PM, Roy Bamford <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Before the flames start lets consider the Package Manager Specification
> (PMS) as an example. For this (very black and white) illustration,
> forget the council discussions to date and imagine that representatives
> of all t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 2008.06.08 10:12, Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> Hello,
>
> looks like every nominee wants the council to be more technical so I
> have a few technical questions for you:
[snip]
Like it or not, the council are our engineering managers, not detailed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 09:38:17 +
Ferris McCormick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 11:12:27 +0200
> "Piotr Jaroszyński" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > looks like e
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 8 Jun 2008 11:12:27 +0200
"Piotr Jaroszyński" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
>
> looks like every nominee wants the council to be more technical so I
> have a few technical questions for you:
>
> 1. GLEP54
> 2. GLEP55
> 3. Most wanted c
On 8 Jun 2008, at 11:12, Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
Hello,
looks like every nominee wants the council to be more technical so I
have a few technical questions for you:
1. GLEP54
2. GLEP55
3. Most wanted changes in future EAPIs
[1] - http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0054.html
[2] - http:
Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
Hello,
looks like every nominee wants the council to be more technical so I
have a few technical questions for you:
1. GLEP54
2. GLEP55
3. Most wanted changes in future EAPIs
4. Strategies to ensure that gentoo's package manager is able to
quickly/smartly/sainly supp
Hello,
looks like every nominee wants the council to be more technical so I
have a few technical questions for you:
1. GLEP54
2. GLEP55
3. Most wanted changes in future EAPIs
[1] - http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0054.html
[2] - http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0055.html
--
Best
62 matches
Mail list logo
