[gentoo-dev] Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[gentoo-dev] Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Samuli Suominen]

# Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org> (10 Feb 2011)
# Unmaintained and completely broken wrt bugs
# 185475, 211262, 247268, 276220, 287751, 293501, 298109,
# 301729, 308801, 311763, 311765, 328691, 340605, 348483,
# 352506, 237366, 250054
# Removal in 30 days
app-pda/barry
app-pda/libopensync
app-pda/libopensync-plugin-evolution2
app-pda/libopensync-plugin-file
app-pda/libopensync-plugin-gnokii
app-pda/libopensync-plugin-google-calendar
app-pda/libopensync-plugin-gpe
app-pda/libopensync-plugin-irmc
app-pda/libopensync-plugin-palm
app-pda/libopensync-plugin-python
app-pda/libopensync-plugin-sunbird
app-pda/libopensync-plugin-syncml
app-pda/libopensync-plugin-vformat
app-pda/msynctool
app-pda/multisync-gui
app-pda/osynctool

Re: [gentoo-dev] Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1518 bytes --]


Sigh. 

After talking to peper, I've been trying to get it running with snapshots recently (in my overlay), with mixed success.

Does anyone here know anything about the 0.40 release - will it be before or after Duke Nukem? (No commits so far since I was waiting for any information about that.)

Samuli, I'll revert the mask tonight for the moment (removing and then soon re-adding makes no sense), until I know more. If the project remains as sluggish as it is now, it should go the way of the dinosaur, though.


On Thursday 10 February 2011 16:23:08 Samuli Suominen wrote:
> # Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org> (10 Feb 2011)
> # Unmaintained and completely broken wrt bugs
> # 185475, 211262, 247268, 276220, 287751, 293501, 298109,
> # 301729, 308801, 311763, 311765, 328691, 340605, 348483,
> # 352506, 237366, 250054
> # Removal in 30 days
> app-pda/barry
> app-pda/libopensync
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-evolution2
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-file
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-gnokii
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-google-calendar
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-gpe
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-irmc
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-palm
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-python
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-sunbird
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-syncml
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-vformat
> app-pda/msynctool
> app-pda/multisync-gui
> app-pda/osynctool
> 
> 

-- 
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer - kde, sci, arm, tex
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Samuli Suominen]

On 02/10/2011 06:30 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> 
> Sigh. 
> 
> After talking to peper, I've been trying to get it running with snapshots recently (in my overlay), with mixed success.
> 
> Does anyone here know anything about the 0.40 release - will it be before or after Duke Nukem? (No commits so far since I was waiting for any information about that.)
> 
> Samuli, I'll revert the mask tonight for the moment (removing and then soon re-adding makes no sense), until I know more. If the project remains as sluggish as it is now, it should go the way of the dinosaur, though.

No you won't unless you make it actually compile and work. Just look at
the bugs.

You can adjust the masks to exclude your new snapshots/versions if you
want, though.

And peper's reply is here:

-- cut --

As sorry I am I didn't have the time to work on it further, it also
didn't quite turn out what I expected it to. So ack from me.

-- Best Regards Piotr Jaroszyński

-- cut --

> 
> 
> On Thursday 10 February 2011 16:23:08 Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> # Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org> (10 Feb 2011)
>> # Unmaintained and completely broken wrt bugs
>> # 185475, 211262, 247268, 276220, 287751, 293501, 298109,
>> # 301729, 308801, 311763, 311765, 328691, 340605, 348483,
>> # 352506, 237366, 250054
>> # Removal in 30 days
>> app-pda/barry
>> app-pda/libopensync
>> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-evolution2
>> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-file
>> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-gnokii
>> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-google-calendar
>> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-gpe
>> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-irmc
>> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-palm
>> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-python
>> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-sunbird
>> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-syncml
>> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-vformat
>> app-pda/msynctool
>> app-pda/multisync-gui
>> app-pda/osynctool
>>
>>
> 

Re: [gentoo-dev] Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1009 bytes --]

On Thursday 10 February 2011 17:40:07 Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 02/10/2011 06:30 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>
> > Samuli, I'll revert the mask tonight for the moment (removing and then soon re-adding makes no sense), until I know more. If the project remains as sluggish as it is now, it should go the way of the dinosaur, though.
> 
> No you won't unless you make it actually compile and work. Just look at
> the bugs.

Fine, let's drop it out of the tree then. This was mainly intended as a statement of "someone is keeping half an eye on what is happening and whether things will improve".

> And peper's reply is here:
> 
> -- cut --

Guys you have a communication problem. Even though you are QA and can do whatever you want it would probably help your public image if you just add to the original e-mail "acked by peper" / "acked by maintainer"...

Cheers, a


-- 
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer - kde, sci, arm, tex
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Diego Elio Pettenò]

Il giorno gio, 10/02/2011 alle 18.00 +0100, Andreas K. Huettel ha
scritto:
> 
> Guys you have a communication problem. Even though you are QA and can
> do whatever you want it would probably help your public image if you
> just add to the original e-mail "acked by peper" / "acked by
> maintainer"... 

Sorry but it really matters very little whether maintainer acks at all,
*if the package fails to build*.

We're not talking about a single problem with a single package.

-- 
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Andreas K. Huettel]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 1004 bytes --]

> Sorry but it really matters very little whether maintainer acks at all,
> *if the package fails to build*.
> 
> We're not talking about a single problem with a single package.

Yes, you are completely right regarding the ebuilds.
I do not dispute at all that masking them is a correct way of action.

However we are talking about interaction of human beings here. 

What I was trying to say: _If_ you have coordinated this with the maintainer, it should be worth the effort to add two words to the email just to mention this. It would even strengthen your argumentative position!

In general, we have had the discussion a few times here already whether briefness/conciseness or politeness/additional information is more important. I agree that this may be a cultural thing. But then, normally the consensus is to rather err on the side of caution...

Cheers, Andreas

-- 
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer - kde, sci, arm, tex
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Krzysztof Pawlik]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1608 bytes --]

On 02/10/11 19:02, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>> Sorry but it really matters very little whether maintainer acks at all, *if
>> the package fails to build*.

I don't agree with that - QA doesn't give anyone a silver bullet for killing
whatever you want (or whatever you think should die). Maintainer must be
*always* notified/pinged/mailed/im'ed/phoned/poked when his package is going to
be masked & removed, if he's responsive then getting his ACK on the matter
shouldn't be a problem, if not... at least you've tried.

>> We're not talking about a single problem with a single package.
> 
> Yes, you are completely right regarding the ebuilds. I do not dispute at all
> that masking them is a correct way of action.
> 
> However we are talking about interaction of human beings here.
> 
> What I was trying to say: _If_ you have coordinated this with the maintainer,
> it should be worth the effort to add two words to the email just to mention
> this. It would even strengthen your argumentative position!
> 
> In general, we have had the discussion a few times here already whether
> briefness/conciseness or politeness/additional information is more important.
> I agree that this may be a cultural thing. But then, normally the consensus
> is to rather err on the side of caution...

It's usually better to be overly verbose in such cases, so yes: if maintainer
said it's ok then please mention that in mask message - it's just few keystrokes
more.

-- 
Krzysztof Pawlik  <nelchael at gentoo.org>  key id: 0xF6A80E46
desktop-misc, java, vim, kernel, python, apache...


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 554 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Diego Elio Pettenò]

Il giorno gio, 10/02/2011 alle 19.44 +0100, Krzysztof Pawlik ha scritto:
> 
> I don't agree with that - QA doesn't give anyone a silver bullet for
> killing
> whatever you want (or whatever you think should die). Maintainer must
> be
> *always* notified/pinged/mailed/im'ed/phoned/poked when his package is
> going to
> be masked & removed, if he's responsive then getting his ACK on the
> matter
> shouldn't be a problem, if not... at least you've tried. 

Please make up your mind on what you don't agree with.

We don't need the ACK but we don't go around masking packages just
because we feel like it. What gets the "Masked for removal by QA"
treatment doesn't need an ACK because it's always stuff that was left
untouched for months if not years.

To rephrase it so that you can get it:

WE DON'T GO AROUND REMOVING ACTIVELY MAINTAINED PACKAGES.

But when the package is unmaintained for months, we don't _need_ the
ACK, nor we'd have to say "we're given the go by the maintainer" or
"maintainer timeout". We simply don't do that if there *is* an active,
interested maintainer.

If you're the active maintainer, you can complain if we didn't poke you,
but you have actually been poked and either not replied or acked it, you
really don't have to read it on the mask reason, unless you suffer from
amnesia. And if you're *not* the active maintainer, why would you care?

Remember that for *all* QA masking, the rule is simple: if you care
about the package you bring it up to standard (cleanup ebuild, fix open
bugs, make sure it doesn't bundle libraries, respects flags, and so on)
and unmask it (the new versions obviously). Otherwise, it'll go away,
full stop.

No, we're not going to stop if "somebody is looking at it": looking at
it doesn't mean that it will ever work, and don't give me the usual
"warn us before" story, 'cause we use 60 days for most un-responsive
packages, and 30 days only when the packages are just so broken up
there's no chance of them working. And even though I don't like it,
there is *nothing* stopping anybody from fixing the packages and
unmasking them on the 29th or 59th day. Warning enough?

-- 
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Krzysztof Pawlik]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2013 bytes --]

On 02/10/11 20:36, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> Il giorno gio, 10/02/2011 alle 19.44 +0100, Krzysztof Pawlik ha scritto:
>>
>> I don't agree with that - QA doesn't give anyone a silver bullet for
>> killing
>> whatever you want (or whatever you think should die). Maintainer must
>> be
>> *always* notified/pinged/mailed/im'ed/phoned/poked when his package is
>> going to
>> be masked & removed, if he's responsive then getting his ACK on the
>> matter
>> shouldn't be a problem, if not... at least you've tried. 
> 
> Please make up your mind on what you don't agree with.

You've just removed the relevant quote, so let me add it again:

Diego: Sorry but it really matters very little whether maintainer acks at all,
*if the package fails to build*.
Andreas: <nothing for this line>
Me: I don't agree with that ... [cut]

Is that clear enough?

> We don't need the ACK but we don't go around masking packages just
> because we feel like it. What gets the "Masked for removal by QA"
> treatment doesn't need an ACK because it's always stuff that was left
> untouched for months if not years.
> 
> To rephrase it so that you can get it:
> 
> WE DON'T GO AROUND REMOVING ACTIVELY MAINTAINED PACKAGES.

(your caps lock is on, please turn it off, thank you)

> But when the package is unmaintained for months, we don't _need_ the
> ACK, nor we'd have to say "we're given the go by the maintainer" or
> "maintainer timeout". We simply don't do that if there *is* an active,
> interested maintainer.
[cut]

I don't exactly see how what you've written is of any relevance to the main
point of this - the original issue was *extremely* simple: whenever maintainer's
(active, inactive, last maintainer, whatever) ACK should be mentioned in the
message that ends up in p.mask -- according to me and Andreas: yes. Look at it
as a kind of 'Signed-Off'.

-- 
Krzysztof Pawlik  <nelchael at gentoo.org>  key id: 0xF6A80E46
desktop-misc, java, vim, kernel, python, apache...


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 554 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1686 bytes --]

On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 17:23:08 +0200
Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org> wrote:

> # Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org> (10 Feb 2011)
> # Unmaintained and completely broken wrt bugs
> # 185475, 211262, 247268, 276220, 287751, 293501, 298109,
> # 301729, 308801, 311763, 311765, 328691, 340605, 348483,
> # 352506, 237366, 250054
> # Removal in 30 days
> app-pda/barry
> app-pda/libopensync
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-evolution2
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-file
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-gnokii
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-google-calendar
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-gpe
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-irmc
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-palm
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-python
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-sunbird
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-syncml
> app-pda/libopensync-plugin-vformat
> app-pda/msynctool
> app-pda/multisync-gui
> app-pda/osynctool

I've been working with barry and it works perfectly fine without libopensync
(guess what the opensync USE flag does). So don't touch it.

Hey, here's an idea.  Before you go making big masks like this for packages
several people depend on, maybe try looking for a maintainer.  I would have
looked at this long ago if someone had simply said "Hey, opensync needs some
lovin".  At least half of the listed bugs are either five-minute fixes or not
grounds for removal (seriously, there's three duplicates, a svn ebuild, and
maintainer-wanted bug).


-- 
fonts, gcc-porting,                  it makes no sense how it makes no sense
toolchain, wxwidgets                           but i'll take it free anytime
@ gentoo.org                EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Samuli Suominen]

On 02/10/2011 10:01 PM, Krzysztof Pawlik wrote:
> I don't exactly see how what you've written is of any relevance to the main
> point of this - the original issue was *extremely* simple: whenever maintainer's
> (active, inactive, last maintainer, whatever) ACK should be mentioned in the
> message that ends up in p.mask -- according to me and Andreas: yes. Look at it
> as a kind of 'Signed-Off'.

it's already ack'd by 185475, 211262, 247268, 276220, 287751, 293501,
298109, 301729, 308801, 311763, 311765, 328691, 340605, 348483, 352506,
237366, and 250054.   no futher justification is required.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Krzysztof Pawlik]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1299 bytes --]

On 02/10/11 21:09, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 02/10/2011 10:01 PM, Krzysztof Pawlik wrote:
>> I don't exactly see how what you've written is of any relevance to the main
>> point of this - the original issue was *extremely* simple: whenever maintainer's
>> (active, inactive, last maintainer, whatever) ACK should be mentioned in the
>> message that ends up in p.mask -- according to me and Andreas: yes. Look at it
>> as a kind of 'Signed-Off'.
> 
> it's already ack'd by 185475, 211262, 247268, 276220, 287751, 293501,
> 298109, 301729, 308801, 311763, 311765, 328691, 340605, 348483, 352506,
> 237366, and 250054.   no futher justification is required.

No. *None* of those bugs even *mentions* QA, the only thing I see is that peper@
really wants to be spanked (possibly with a sledgehammer or something else of
appropriate size and mass). If Piotr doesn't want to maintain those packages he
should send out an e-mail that there are a few packages up for grabs, not sit on
those bugs for >12 months. If we can't get new maintainer (or proxy-maintainer)
then you're free to kill them.

Anyway: looks like Ryan wants to take a look at those packages.

-- 
Krzysztof Pawlik  <nelchael at gentoo.org>  key id: 0xF6A80E46
desktop-misc, java, vim, kernel, python, apache...


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 554 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Diego Elio Pettenò]

Il giorno gio, 10/02/2011 alle 14.08 -0600, Ryan Hill ha scritto:
> Hey, here's an idea.  Before you go making big masks like this for
> packages
> several people depend on, maybe try looking for a maintainer. 

That is *exactly* what these masks are. And you should know there is
*no* "five minutes fix".

-- 
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Andreas K. Huettel]

On Thursday 10 February 2011 21:49:53 Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> Il giorno gio, 10/02/2011 alle 14.08 -0600, Ryan Hill ha scritto:
> > Hey, here's an idea.  Before you go making big masks like this for
> > packages
> > several people depend on, maybe try looking for a maintainer.
> 
> That is *exactly* what these masks are. And you should know there is
> *no* "five minutes fix".

Hey come on. If you really wanted to find a maintainer, you'd have given me 
the time to check back with upstream instead of just refusing a revert. 

Packages oscillating in and out of package mask (however broken) is also not 
nice for the user.

-- 

Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer 
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/

[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Diego Elio Pettenò]

Il giorno gio, 10/02/2011 alle 22.03 +0100, Andreas K. Huettel ha
scritto:
> Hey come on. If you really wanted to find a maintainer, you'd have
> given me 
> the time to check back with upstream instead of just refusing a
> revert. 

You get to maintain (and unmask) the package *after* it's fixed. Not
before.

Unmasking a package that is *broken* because you feel you *may* get the
next version working is simply wrong.

If you really wanted to fix it this bad, you would have done so rather
than spent the time bitching on the mailing list.

Repeat after me: "I won't unmask packages until they are fixed".

-- 
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/

[gentoo-dev] Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 970 bytes --]

On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 21:49:53 +0100
Diego Elio Pettenò <flameeyes@gmail.com> wrote:

> Il giorno gio, 10/02/2011 alle 14.08 -0600, Ryan Hill ha scritto:
> > Hey, here's an idea.  Before you go making big masks like this for
> > packages
> > several people depend on, maybe try looking for a maintainer. 
> 
> That is *exactly* what these masks are. And you should know there is
> *no* "five minutes fix".

Seriously?  You prefer to let things get so bad it has to be removed before
looking for someone to work on it?  If you think this is a better way to do
QA than an email saying "Hey, this package needs some attention. Anyone want
to look at it before it gets too bad?" then I really don't know what to say.


-- 
fonts, gcc-porting,                  it makes no sense how it makes no sense
toolchain, wxwidgets                           but i'll take it free anytime
@ gentoo.org                EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Alec Warner]

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Ryan Hill <dirtyepic@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Feb 2011 21:49:53 +0100
> Diego Elio Pettenò <flameeyes@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Il giorno gio, 10/02/2011 alle 14.08 -0600, Ryan Hill ha scritto:
>> > Hey, here's an idea.  Before you go making big masks like this for
>> > packages
>> > several people depend on, maybe try looking for a maintainer.
>>
>> That is *exactly* what these masks are. And you should know there is
>> *no* "five minutes fix".
>
> Seriously?  You prefer to let things get so bad it has to be removed before
> looking for someone to work on it?  If you think this is a better way to do
> QA than an email saying "Hey, this package needs some attention. Anyone want
> to look at it before it gets too bad?" then I really don't know what to say.

1) Most of the packages touched in this manner are usually
maintainer-wanted / needed or haven't been touched in years.  I don't
think sending email every week saying 'hey who wants to work on fixing
X' is really that effective in getting help.

2) What is effective is masking a package and telling people you are
doing to delete it in X days.  Audiences who do not read email (or do
not subscribe to this list) notice when they can't install something
anymore.

Is it annoying to folks?  Sure.  I'm not sure how much more annoying
it is than trying to build some package that has been in the tree
since 2004 but hasn't been touched since 2007 and doesn't build on a
modern system.

I would prefer this process not become the perfect bureaucratic storm.

-A

>
>
> --
> fonts, gcc-porting,                  it makes no sense how it makes no sense
> toolchain, wxwidgets                           but i'll take it free anytime
> @ gentoo.org                EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662
>

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Samuli Suominen]

On 02/10/2011 11:03 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> On Thursday 10 February 2011 21:49:53 Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
>> Il giorno gio, 10/02/2011 alle 14.08 -0600, Ryan Hill ha scritto:
>>> Hey, here's an idea.  Before you go making big masks like this for
>>> packages
>>> several people depend on, maybe try looking for a maintainer.
>>
>> That is *exactly* what these masks are. And you should know there is
>> *no* "five minutes fix".
> 
> Hey come on. If you really wanted to find a maintainer, you'd have given me 
> the time to check back with upstream instead of just refusing a revert. 
> 
> Packages oscillating in and out of package mask (however broken) is also not 
> nice for the user.
> 

I'm not sure if you understand opensync then, there's 3-4 series in tree
and mostly not compatible with each other:
0.22, 0.36, 0.39 and latest being live 9999.

What you suggested about reverting would have exposed all of them to
users again. Fixing latest is *not* enough.

Instead you should unmask what you *have fixed* per series (version).

- Samuli

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Andreas K. Huettel]

On Thursday 10 February 2011 22:57:41 Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
[snip]

Repeat after me: "Politeness and professional courtesy is an integral part of 
our QA team policy."

--

Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer 
dilfridge@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/

[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Diego Elio Pettenò]

Il giorno ven, 11/02/2011 alle 09.17 +0100, Andreas K. Huettel ha
scritto:
> 
> Repeat after me: "Politeness and professional courtesy is an integral
> part of 
> our QA team policy." 

Politeness is due where politeness is received. If you keep
second-guessing QA team, without looking at the packages at all (see
Samuli's mail) you're not going to receive any.

-- 
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
http://blog.flameeyes.eu/

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 666 bytes --]

On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 10:23:19 +0100
Diego Elio Pettenò <flameeyes@gmail.com> wrote:
> Politeness is due where politeness is received. If you keep
> second-guessing QA team, without looking at the packages at all (see
> Samuli's mail) you're not going to receive any.

Sorry, but that violates the devrel Etiquette Policy [1], which quite
clearly states that:

    One should try to not be rude, abusive or impolite under any
    circumstances.

I look forward to seeing your proposed change to QA policy to bring it
in line with this requirement.

[1]: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=3&chap=2

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Ryan Hill]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1041 bytes --]

On Fri, 11 Feb 2011 07:40:53 +0200
Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 02/10/2011 11:03 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> I'm not sure if you understand opensync then, there's 3-4 series in tree
> and mostly not compatible with each other:
> 0.22, 0.36, 0.39 and latest being live 9999.

0.39 is fixed.  0.36 we'll keep around since very few of the plugins seem to
be ported to 0.39 (just looking at the dependencies), but it needs a lot more
work than 0.39.  I know barry needs 0.22 but I looked at cherry-picking some
upstream patches to bring it up to date a few months ago.  If there are no
other users then I think we should stabilize 0.36 once it's resolved and drop
0.22.  I'm not interested in maintaining the live ebuild but I can get it up
to date at least.


-- 
fonts, gcc-porting,                  it makes no sense how it makes no sense
toolchain, wxwidgets                           but i'll take it free anytime
@ gentoo.org                EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Jacob Godserv]

On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 14:36, Diego Elio Pettenò <flameeyes@gmail.com> wrote:
> Remember that for *all* QA masking, the rule is simple

Could you point me to the Q/A policies and rules? I'm curious now,
seeing this intense discussion about what's right for Q/A, what the
official Q/A docs say.

-- 
    Jacob

    "For then there will be great distress, unequaled
    from the beginning of the world until now — and never
    to be equaled again. If those days had not been cut
    short, no one would survive, but for the sake of the
    elect those days will be shortened."

    Are you ready?

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Lastrite: app-pda/libopensync and reverse dependencies

[Krzysztof Pawlik]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 550 bytes --]

On 02/14/11 07:13, Jacob Godserv wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 14:36, Diego Elio Pettenò <flameeyes@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Remember that for *all* QA masking, the rule is simple
> 
> Could you point me to the Q/A policies and rules? I'm curious now,
> seeing this intense discussion about what's right for Q/A, what the
> official Q/A docs say.
> 

It's available here: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/qa/index.xml

-- 
Krzysztof Pawlik  <nelchael at gentoo.org>  key id: 0xF6A80E46
desktop-misc, java, vim, kernel, python, apache...


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 554 bytes --]