On 06/12/2013 06:51 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'd like to raise another issue I've met again recently. Shortly put,
> some of our projects are relying too much on their overlays. The net
> result is that some of their packages in the tree are not well-tested,
> semi-broken and users end
On 6/16/13 12:36 AM, Alexander V Vershilov wrote:
> In this is a continuation of a 'gentoo-haskell' sub-thread I have to say that
> Chromium and co. it not a development library this is a end user application.
> End user applications should be in tree (except for some testing reasons), if
> not jus
On 16 June 2013 08:08, "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." wrote:
> On 6/12/13 11:51 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
>> Still seems like working in gentoo-x86 without doing stabilization
>> would cover most of those bases. Working in the unstable main tree is
>> still a lot better than keeping stuff out there in an ov
On 6/12/13 11:51 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> Still seems like working in gentoo-x86 without doing stabilization
> would cover most of those bases. Working in the unstable main tree is
> still a lot better than keeping stuff out there in an overlay, IMO.
+1
This works really well for the Gentoo C
On 06/13/2013 12:56 AM, Alexander V Vershilov wrote:
>> The main reason it isn't is because nobody wants to use CVS. For
>> good
examples, see sunrise or
>> gentoo-haskell.
>
> As a part of gentoo-haskell team, I'd like to say that CVS issue is
> not strongest one, there are much more meaningful
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 15:31:57 -0700
Greg Turner wrote:
> Anyhow, isn't the gentoo-x86 tree already plenty big enough, without
> every single overlay's ebuilds and eclasses in there too? Personally,
> I'm inclined to wish it was smaller, even if that meant more stuff was
> pushed into overlays
Ac
Am 13.06.2013 07:44, schrieb Michał Górny:
> Dnia 2013-06-12, o godz. 13:23:04
> Michael Orlitzky napisał(a):
>
>> We need worse support for overlays, i.e. no. Having to use >3 overlays
>> defeats the purpose of a QA'd tree. Everything in an (official)
>> overlay should be in package.mask instead
On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 6:56 AM, Alexander V Vershilov
wrote:
> The main point that haskell ecosystem is very breaky and only latest
> version is supported, so
> the safest path is to be on a bleeding edge and patch inconsistent
> applications. So if one
> package gets updated then commonly we nee
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
Dnia 2013-06-12, o godz. 13:23:04
Michael Orlitzky napisał(a):
> We need worse support for overlays, i.e. no. Having to use >3 overlays
> defeats the purpose of a QA'd tree. Everything in an (official)
> overlay should be in package.mask instead. T
> The main reason it isn't is because nobody wants to use CVS. For good
> examples, see sunrise or
> gentoo-haskell.
As a part of gentoo-haskell team, I'd like to say that CVS issue is
not strongest one, there are
much more meaningful reasons for having much stuff in overlays at
least for haskell
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:10 PM, Andreas K. Huettel
wrote:
>
> Ah btw how's that git migration coming along?
>
Even though we're drifting here an update is probably due.
At this point I'd say we have pretty high confidence that we can
accurately migrate the tree. The issues that remain shouldn'
On 06/12/2013 06:31 PM, Greg Turner wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Michael Orlitzky
> wrote:
>> On 06/12/2013 01:13 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>>> On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 19:05:29 +0200 hasufell
>>> wrote:
> Isn't it more an indication that Gentoo needs better package
> managemen
On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 10:23 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
> On 06/12/2013 01:13 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 19:05:29 +0200 hasufell
>> wrote:
Isn't it more an indication that Gentoo needs better package
management support for overlays?
>>
>>> No.
>>
>
> We need wor
> -Original Message-
> From: Michał Górny [mailto:mgo...@gentoo.org]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 9:51 AM
> To: Gentoo Developer Mailing List
> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Over-reliance of Gentoo projects on overlays
> Hello,
>
> I'd like to raise another
Am Mittwoch, 12. Juni 2013, 18:59:48 schrieb hasufell:
> On 06/12/2013 06:51 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Teams, what are the main reasons for keeping that much stuff in
> > overlays?
>
> It's a mix of easier workflow especially for contributors and less
> responsibility/noise in case of bugs.
>
>
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/12/2013 01:13 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 19:05:29 +0200 hasufell
> wrote:
>>> Isn't it more an indication that Gentoo needs better package
>>> management support for overlays?
>
>> No.
>
> You make a persuasive argument.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/12/2013 07:13 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 19:05:29 +0200 hasufell
> wrote:
>>> Isn't it more an indication that Gentoo needs better package
>>> management support for overlays?
>
>> No.
>
> You make a persuasive argument.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 19:05:29 +0200
hasufell wrote:
> > Isn't it more an indication that Gentoo needs better package
> > management support for overlays?
>
> No.
You make a persuasive argument. I realise now that the Summer of Code
projects for this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/12/2013 07:02 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 18:59:48 +0200 hasufell
> wrote:
>> On 06/12/2013 06:51 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>>>
>>> Teams, what are the main reasons for keeping that much stuff
>>> in overlays?
>>>
>
>> It's
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 12 Jun 2013 18:59:48 +0200
hasufell wrote:
> On 06/12/2013 06:51 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> >
> > Teams, what are the main reasons for keeping that much stuff in
> > overlays?
> >
>
> It's a mix of easier workflow especially for contributors
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 06/12/2013 06:51 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> Teams, what are the main reasons for keeping that much stuff in
> overlays?
>
It's a mix of easier workflow especially for contributors and less
responsibility/noise in case of bugs.
If there is a bug
Hello,
I'd like to raise another issue I've met again recently. Shortly put,
some of our projects are relying too much on their overlays. The net
result is that some of their packages in the tree are not well-tested,
semi-broken and users end up being hurt by that.
The major project where this ca
22 matches
Mail list logo
