Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage Integrity (Was: gcc ebuild's, downgrades, deletion etc)

[Jon Portnoy <avenj@gentoo.org>]

On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 03:12:04PM -0800, Matt Tucker wrote:
> -- Spider <spider@gentoo.org> spake thusly:
> 
> > begin  quote
> > On Fri, 14 Mar 2003 06:19:17 -0700
> > Alain Penders <alain@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > 
> >> > I'm forced to proofread the new builds completely as to avoid
> >> > getting messed over.
> > 
> >> Maybe because they trust that all our developers know how to diff a
> >> submitted ebuild against the last approved one?
> > 
> > What do you think I mean with proofread, really?
> > (vimdiff and gtkdiff are both quite handy on larger stuff , gdm comes
> > to mind as more or less a nightmareish example) 
> >  
> >> Even with a changelog entry, I would never add a user-submitted
> >> ebuild without diffing it and making sure I know what changed and
> >> why.
> > 
> > of course not, I'm not inclined to have my or others systems
> > compromised or messed over, But my point is: adding a ChangeLog  or
> > stating what is done difference does make a change when submitting a
> > build for something thats already in the tree.
> 
> While it's an excellent point that users should submit Changelogs, it
> doesn't really address the original issue. To summarize, I believe the
> conversation went like this:
> 
> user> I submitted a new ebuild with some changes, but the developer
>       simply copied the old ebuild instead of using my new one.
> 
> dev> We have problems with users simply copying old builds to create
>      the new one without submitting a Changelog. This makes it hard
>      for us to figure out what's been changed.
> 
> I fail to see how this justifies using the old build instead of the new
> one. I fail, in fact, to see how the reply is even related to initial
> complaint.. If it's a problem for users to do "cp old.build new.build",
> why is it okay for a dev to do it _when a new build has been supplied_?
> 
> And if there's not sufficient information to determine what's changed
> in the ebuild (and you don't have the time to review a diff), wouldn't
> it be better to kick it back to the submitter rather than ignoring what
> they've submitted and using the old build for the new version? A diff
> -q doesn't take any longer than a cp, and submitting changes without
> submitting a changelog seems ample justification for refusing to commit
> them.
> 
> 

My opinion here is: if you don't have the time to take a look at the 
diff, don't accept the bug containing the ebuild. Pass it on to someone 
who does have the time rather than risk borkage by just copying the old 
ebuild.

-- 
Jon Portnoy

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list