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 94939138334 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 13:44:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6481AE08AA; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 13:44:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (woodpecker.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 28DF5E087B for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 13:44:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.100] (c-98-218-46-55.hsd1.md.comcast.net [98.218.46.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mjo) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 548F434C2D9 for ; Fri, 25 Oct 2019 13:43:58 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Editing RDEPEND without a new revision (again) To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <40425a02-6e15-6757-d17f-6f509eccf21d@gentoo.org> <4fa10436-c795-8dd3-c932-75b0a56da503@veremit.xyz> From: Michael Orlitzky Message-ID: <22a0ad52-f835-65ad-255a-4f2d146b2988@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2019 09:43:53 -0400 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.9.0 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 X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <4fa10436-c795-8dd3-c932-75b0a56da503@veremit.xyz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 852ac01c-7df8-4436-a726-ad3f779f773f X-Archives-Hash: d35e1dc4bd176315429280a30ce56de3 On 10/24/19 10:03 PM, Michael Everitt wrote: > > Forgive my lack of git-fu, but which commit did this? Can we name & shame > the author and committer publicly, and in front of QA, so that this kind of > violation is highlighted to all, and noted for future reference? > I left it out on purpose. This isn't a one-person problem, and my anger isn't only targeted at the last person who was unlucky enough to do it right before I snapped and wrote the email. This comes up on the -dev list several times a year. We've fought about ecosystems adding dependencies to stable packages via eclass USE flags. We fight about the revision policy in the devmanual. We've been fighting about dynamic dependencies in the package manager for 10+ years. The portage team basically quit once over this. A few years later we fought about it again and finally turned them off, but the commit got reverted when users complained that developers were constantly breaking things. That contributed to a fork of the package manager... Point is, it's not a new thing. And it's a huge waste of time for everyone involved. It's also simple to avoid. Just make a new revision when you change something. You shouldn't be changing stable ebuilds *anyway*, but if you're already going to violate that policy, it doesn't do any more harm to move it to -r1 in the process.