public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Matt Turner <mattst88@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: EGO_SUM
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 16:47:15 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAEdQ38FppfiBkniSkNj+W0zzpOaWb5hhUyi3Ki_fefh=t5oEjw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7153177d-94fb-95b6-9154-fa1d0864a756@gentoo.org>

On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 3:31 PM Andrew Ammerlaan
<andrewammerlaan@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> On 26/04/2023 18:12, Matt Turner wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 11:31 AM Florian Schmaus <flow@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >> The discussion would be more productive if someone who is supporting the
> >> EGO_SUM deprecation could rationally summarize the main arguments why we
> >> deprecated EGO_SUM.
> >
> > You're requesting the changes. It's on you to read the previous
> > threads and try to understand. It's not others' responsibilities to
> > justify the status quo to you, but tl;dr is Manifest files grew to
> > insane sizes for golang packages with many dependencies, and the
> > Manifest size is a cost all Gentoo users pay regardless of whether
> > they use the package.
> >
>
> This is a valid point and I think it is clear. What is not clear however
> is why the EGO_SUM method should be dropped entirely instead of keeping
> it as an option for overlays (with an appropriate warning). As I
> remember this is where the discussion got 'stuck' last time.
>
> There are other cases where things are possible but prohibited in
> ::gentoo by policy. E.g. the acct-user eclass allows setting
> ACCT_USER_ID to -1 for dynamic assignment, but we do not allow this in
> ::gentoo. I don't see why we could not do the same for EGO_SUM, keep it
> as an option, while disallowing it in ::gentoo.

I suspect allowing it unrestricted in overlays is fine—which seems to
be the major practical issue that spurred this thread.

Sam suggested a requirement for a maximum Manifest size (presumably
thinking about ::gentoo), and Florian replied:

> Asking to impose an artificial limit is based on the same unfounded
> belief under which EGO_SUM was deprecated in the first place. I am
> worried that if we follow this, then a potential next step is to argue
> about adding packages to ::gentoo.

So I think that's where the disagreement is.


  parent reply	other threads:[~2023-04-26 20:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 51+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2023-04-17  7:37 [gentoo-dev] EGO_SUM Florian Schmaus
2023-04-17  9:28 ` [gentoo-dev] EGO_SUM Anna (cybertailor) Vyalkova
2023-04-27 18:00   ` William Hubbs
2023-04-27 18:18     ` David Seifert
2023-04-24 16:11 ` Florian Schmaus
2023-04-24 20:28   ` Sam James
2023-04-24 22:52     ` Alexey Zapparov
2023-04-26 15:31     ` Florian Schmaus
2023-04-26 16:12       ` Matt Turner
2023-04-26 19:31         ` Andrew Ammerlaan
2023-04-26 19:38           ` Chris Pritchard
2023-04-26 20:47           ` Matt Turner [this message]
2023-04-27  7:58         ` Florian Schmaus
2023-04-27  9:24           ` Ulrich Mueller
2023-04-28  6:59             ` Florian Schmaus
2023-04-27 12:54           ` Michał Górny
2023-04-27 23:12             ` Pascal Jäger
2023-04-28  0:38               ` Sam James
2023-04-28  4:27                 ` Michał Górny
2023-04-28  5:31                   ` Sam James
2023-04-28  6:59             ` Florian Schmaus
2023-04-28 14:34               ` Michał Górny
2023-05-02 19:32                 ` Florian Schmaus
2023-05-02 19:38                   ` Sam James
2023-04-29 22:34               ` Robin H. Johnson
2023-04-27 21:16           ` Sam James
2023-05-02 19:32             ` Florian Schmaus
2023-05-02 19:45               ` Sam James
2023-05-08  7:53                 ` Florian Schmaus
2023-05-08 12:03                   ` Michał Górny
2023-05-22  7:14                     ` Florian Schmaus
2023-05-02 20:04               ` Matt Turner
2023-05-08  7:53                 ` Florian Schmaus
2023-04-26 20:51       ` Sam James
2023-05-30 15:52   ` Florian Schmaus
2023-05-30 16:30     ` Anna (cybertailor) Vyalkova
2023-05-31  5:02       ` Oskari Pirhonen
2023-05-30 16:35     ` Arthur Zamarin
2023-05-31  6:20       ` Andrew Ammerlaan
2023-05-31  8:40         ` Ryan Qian
2023-05-31  9:06         ` Arsen Arsenović
2023-05-31  6:30       ` pascal.jaeger leimstift.de
2023-06-01  4:00         ` William Hubbs
2023-06-02  8:17       ` Florian Schmaus
2023-06-02  8:31         ` Michał Górny
2023-06-09 10:07           ` Florian Schmaus
2023-06-01 19:55 ` [gentoo-dev] EGO_SUM William Hubbs
2023-06-02  7:13   ` Joonas Niilola
2023-06-02 18:06     ` William Hubbs
2023-06-02 18:42       ` Joonas Niilola
2023-06-09 10:07   ` Florian Schmaus

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='CAEdQ38FppfiBkniSkNj+W0zzpOaWb5hhUyi3Ki_fefh=t5oEjw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=mattst88@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@lists.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