From: Arthur Zamarin <arthurzam@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Cc: glep@gentoo.org, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org>
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [DRAFT v2] GLEP 84: Standard format for package.mask files
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2023 19:30:32 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <56605afb-664c-4ddb-a513-09b6c327a915@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ulec6se11@gentoo.org>
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2318 bytes --]
On 13/10/2023 19.06, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 13 Oct 2023, Arthur Zamarin wrote:
>
>> Comments Block
>> --------------
>
>> The comments block consists of 2 mandatory parts (`author line`_ and
>> `explanation`_) and one optional part (`last-rite epilogue`_). A blank line to
>> separate the parts is optional. Trailing whitespace should be dropped.
>
>> The lines in the comment block are prefixed with a "#" symbol. The comments
>> should be separated with single space from the "#", unless this is trailing
>> whitespace, in which case it should be removed (meaning blank lines in comments
>> block are just "#\n").
>
> Maybe flip these two paragraphs? Otherwise it is not entirely clear
> whether the "blank line" mentioned in the first paragraph refers to a
> true blank line, or to a line consisting of a single number sign.
I agree with you.
>> The paragraph should be of format ``Removal on ${DATE}. ${BUGS-LIST}``, where
>> the date is RFC-3339 full-date format, meaning ``YYYY-MM-DD``, and the bugs
>> list is of the `bugs list`_ format. The listed bugs should include the
>> last-rite bug opened, and potentially more relevant bugs which weren't listed
>> in the explanation paragraphs.
>
> Does this mean that only the first of the following entries would be
> valid?
>
> # Removal on 2023-11-13. Bugs #678901, #890123
> # Removal on 2023-11-13, bugs #678901, #890123.
> # Removal on 2023-11-13. Bugs #678901 #890123
>
> IMHO that would be too restrictive. Punctuation shouldn't be significant
> there. (This doesn't preclude _recommending_ one of the variants.)
Your current interpretation was correct. My main goal is to define a
"precise" format, so it easy to parse for render of mask (i.e. soko). I
also think we have nothing to gain from allowing "," instead of "."
after removal date, but not that I care. Same for bugs-list, I'm fine
with making the "," optional, but I want us to define a "precise regex"
so we have consistent format for important bits of mask message. Does
this seem good enough for you?
BUGS-LIST ::= [Bb]ugs? #\d+(,? +#\d+)*
LAST-RITE ::= Removal on {DATE}[.,]? +{BUGS-LIST}.?
> Ulrich
--
Arthur Zamarin
arthurzam@gentoo.org
Gentoo Linux developer (Python, pkgcore stack, Arch Teams, GURU)
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 488 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-10-13 16:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-10-13 14:11 [gentoo-dev] [DRAFT v2] GLEP 84: Standard format for package.mask files Arthur Zamarin
2023-10-13 16:06 ` [gentoo-dev] " Ulrich Mueller
2023-10-13 16:30 ` Arthur Zamarin [this message]
2023-10-13 18:42 ` Ulrich Mueller
2023-10-13 19:35 ` Arthur Zamarin
2023-10-13 19:46 ` Ulrich Mueller
2023-10-13 18:49 ` [gentoo-dev] " Ulrich Mueller
2023-10-13 19:32 ` Arthur Zamarin
2023-10-13 19:43 ` Ulrich Mueller
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=56605afb-664c-4ddb-a513-09b6c327a915@gentoo.org \
--to=arthurzam@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
--cc=glep@gentoo.org \
--cc=ulm@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