From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9CBE1382C5 for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 07:34:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 948E5E093D; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 07:33:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (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 3EAF5E0919 for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 07:33:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from katipo2.lan (unknown [203.86.205.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: kentnl) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AFEA9335C0A for ; Wed, 21 Mar 2018 07:33:53 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 20:33:35 +1300 From: Kent Fredric To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Begin a dev-libs/nodejs category? Message-ID: <20180321203335.17c9a2f5@katipo2.lan> In-Reply-To: References: <6d081572-1b9a-663e-5993-8143518cf0cd@gmail.com> <87a7v2s3wx.fsf@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.15.1-dirty (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; boundary="Sig_//jVbn/T3RJq5/2Fz_gjwwoD"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 0ac510b7-8a61-4ec3-807c-09465c4dba39 X-Archives-Hash: 8965402367365c0bc232b8b06e723bda --Sig_//jVbn/T3RJq5/2Fz_gjwwoD Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 01:44:11 +0000 Herb Miller Jr. wrote: > If I am, then yes, some kind of automation > would be the only sane way to keep up In my experience you can't *really* rely on automation 100% for this sort of thing. Not while achieving quality results. Its viable for an overlay where there's no expectations of quality, but for the main tree, I find you want to have a human san-check everything and manually vet each upstream version for "anomalous things". Automation is good at handling the "known predictable" cases, humans are better at detecting "huh, that's weird, why did they do that?" Because you absolutely want to know if upstream added some stupid change that is harmful to Gentoo users before you blindly replicate it. --Sig_//jVbn/T3RJq5/2Fz_gjwwoD Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAEBCAAdFiEEPZazbI/qrFT1o9rn6FQySxNmqCAFAlqyCtsACgkQ6FQySxNm qCD4MA//Q4wFv4te36nZCcvKwHmv0lqto53RohnF/lPRBtmadwghmWPzrQNFi33J wvnpVT7T8Y5sTH8oXv6QC+cEsAJv1gvE6JLi5EHd2z5BvgamVzi9UBS1UR3jGVpB FhUcfCEg36o5lCEkETJshkmXgBwI1XOvIzKPdL4HZ0GcYgBafQwrBZdeZha7RvTy zQzx8fNSvyFtP6N3fmuVzk4jx9VHXPPBNXyAfrZ7xQCeE+OCjsvJqKNI69SDLBWX P9AB6uYQ9Q3FF7U3S9+kTuQTlZxoLNn/J3H4/hJC5559f40Q2WnheF486Fui7df4 RHXc463Xs2t+1QjHTBX5x/8ffg0TIsBRg6eObRipU/pV/e09uir94SBuUjRuDNme DPsWItQLBCEhvkD0T3WaSXjnQUE/44keVPHaZ4iVnqqdp9k2BmMGlCnjtqyInAyT X7uD9ozODIMgA4sfslBhQmPQ3/95Hwze4Zd4p685022szlUjM1N4FovIbxVmxS32 0jHJ326MeMy93on92VMFVy0dXUA9Z4Dyc6yWfi56SghFOfRd/uIbL3Ydo4y1tBa4 LUJ699OzhZ3+lGXj04+EIdrgiTbsO4CCCsk+SbZ67sMB0eVAXYxFladNWYB1UD9y 8q2eYY3ekaUMVyj1XYTwLVzpIKCseqr5QJTnSoA/h76YnEEtTBs= =rWuk -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_//jVbn/T3RJq5/2Fz_gjwwoD--