From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 78BFC138C9D for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 14:25:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0E1B4E09A7; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 14:25:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.schwarzvogel.de (skade.schwarzvogel.de [144.76.18.87]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EBD8EE0966 for ; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 14:25:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from klausman by mail.schwarzvogel.de with local (Exim 4.85) (envelope-from ) id 1Yn1U8-000Vua-E2 for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 28 Apr 2015 11:07:20 +0200 Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2015 11:07:20 +0200 From: Tobias Klausmann Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Hey arch teams, we need your input! Message-ID: <20150428090720.GA118872@skade.schwarzvogel.de> References: <201504112150.13880.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <1430042363.29685.8.camel@gentoo.org> <20150426182046.0ef76a2e@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable In-Reply-To: <20150426182046.0ef76a2e@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: Tobias Klausmann X-Archives-Salt: 1d0f88b8-405b-4506-8e22-5bc21b81bc8f X-Archives-Hash: d510db6f544c0331fb3d8f52ade77320 Hi!=20 On Sun, 26 Apr 2015, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 08:04:11 -0400 > Rich Freeman wrote: > > If we're talking about human parsing, can you give an example of how > > variation makes your life more difficult today? I'm just trying to > > understand what we're trying to fix... >=20 > Reading through hundreds of Summaries. If the atoms and the request > variant are always in the same place, parsing by humans is MUCH quicker. Look at security bugs that ask for stabilization with the goal of having a GLSA. The bugs all look the same and I wish all stabilization and keywording bugs adopted the same format. There is one corner case where that format is not enough: multiple ebuilds/versions with non-homogenic archs, i.e.: cat-egory/packageA-1.2.3 amd64 x86 alpha cat-egory/packageB-2.3.9 amd64 alpha cat-egory/packageC-3.99 amd64 x86 ppc64 cat-egory/packageD-10.2.5a alpha The format I used here seemes to be slightly more common than others and it is good enough for me=E2=84=A2. Any add-on prose should be _after_ the standardized bit. And while we're talking about ponies: Let's make it trivial for the requester to also specify the _correct and complete_ list of per-arch dependencies that also need to be tested and keyworded. It is one of the most annoying things about stabilization bugs: having to hunt dependencies. Side note: please make sure to include all FEATURES=3Dtest gated dependencies, too. The prose should also mention if there are circular ones (I'm looking at you, dev-ruby/*). There, now that's off my chest. Regards, Tobias --=20 Sent from aboard the Culture ship GCU Sacrificial Victim