Re: Common sense in [gentoo-dev] (was Council May Summary: Changes to ChangeLog handling)

[Brian Harring <ferringb@gmail.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1450 bytes --]

On Tue, May 31, 2011 at 12:05:03AM +0200, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> Am Montag 30 Mai 2011, 23:55:52 schrieb Brian Harring:
> > If someone has a definition that is commonsense, then propose it- the
> > current "you must log everything" is very, very heavy handed and
> > basically was a forced situation since QA cannot make folks behave
> > when the rules are reliant on common sense.
> 
> Well how about "any change that can influence the behaviour of (portage|your 
> favourite package manager) in any way or present the user with different 
> output"?

Mostly correct, although the problem there is 'influence'; consider:

src_unpack() {
  bunch of code
}

being changed into

new_func() {
  bunch of code
}
src_unpack() {
  invoke new_func
}

That should have no influence, thus not being ChangeLog'd.  The 
problem is when the dev screws up, and it *has* an influence but no 
ChangeLog.

A more real world example is people abusing eval and other things 
(python eclass for example)- folks can/do argue that it has no 
influence, but the complexity means it may have unexpected affect.

That's the crux of the issue, and it comes down to common sense.  
Come up w/ a sane policy for things like that and I'll owe you some 
beer.

Either way, for the rest of it, as Diego said, LGTM.  I'm just 
nitpicking here to make it absolutely clear to people where we start 
running into policy issues.

~brian

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