From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.3/8.13.3) with ESMTP id j2E9O0ce016760 for ; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:24:00 GMT Received: from vericgar.icehouse.net ([216.255.199.129] helo=mooncougar.garjasp.com) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DAlnp-0006gL-DD for gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:23:59 +0000 Received: from [10.0.1.80] ([10.0.1.80]) (AUTH: LOGIN admin) by mooncougar.garjasp.com with esmtp; Mon, 14 Mar 2005 01:23:49 -0800 id 00085674.42355825.00002C14 Message-ID: <4235581A.7010700@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 14 Mar 2005 01:23:38 -0800 From: Michael Stewart User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20050205) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: , , List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=_mooncougar.garjasp.com-11284-1110792229-0001-2" To: gentoo-dev@robin.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] apache and ~arch References: <20050313172441.GA21923@dst.grantgoodyear.org> In-Reply-To: <20050313172441.GA21923@dst.grantgoodyear.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.89.5.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime X-Archives-Salt: d8a6a181-7959-412a-92d8-ebc1561569ac X-Archives-Hash: 4a3edaf2471a51289bba2c3a6c45f9c3 This is a MIME-formatted message. If you see this text it means that your E-mail software does not support MIME-formatted messages. --=_mooncougar.garjasp.com-11284-1110792229-0001-2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Grant Goodyear wrote: > The serious breakage for people occurred because the apache devs > released into ~arch the new apache ebuild before a number of rather > important apache-module ebuilds had been rewritten to use the new > apache config. Now, I think we've all done things like that (forgotten > a dependency, or something that uses the current package as a > dependency, or missed an obscure USE flag) by accident, and that's why > we have an ~arch tree. The ~arch tree, at least in my understanding, > is for testing ebuilds, and it's not surprising that sometimes the > e-build has an error in it. However, I don't believe that ~arch should > be used for ebuilds that one _knows_ have broken functionality. For > such cases we have package.mask. In defense of the Apache team, and myself as I am leading the unmasking of Apache and it's modules.... I believe the specific situation you are referring to is mod_php. We did patch it and have it hard masked, and wanted the php herd's stamp of approval before we unmasked it. All of us that are working on this are rather new developers (I myself have only been a dev since December), and didn't want to break someone else's package, especially one as complex as PHP. So we left it hard-masked while unmasking ours, and referenced users to the already open bug about mod_php and also pointed users at the hard-masked revision of mod_php that worked for us. I agree it could have been handled better, but what we did seemed like enough at the time. The packages are in ~arch, and we never intended them to go to stable without all other expected packages there as well. Some have suggested that we move backwards into hard-mask. I disagree with this. When we moved from hard-mask to ~arch, we did so to get a wider testing audience. We have run into a few glitches here and there, but that is the point of ~arch, to work all the glitches out before moving to stable. The major breakage that most users came across was the unexpected non-working of mod_php. And now mod_php revision that works with the new apache revision is no longer in hard-mask. Moving back to hard-mask at this point in time would only cause more headaches then pushing forward to get everything working together. Arguments for either side are welcome however. -- Michael Stewart vericgar@gentoo.org Gentoo Developer http://dev.gentoo.org/~vericgar GnuPG Key ID 0x08614788 available on http://pgp.mit.edu -- --=_mooncougar.garjasp.com-11284-1110792229-0001-2 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCNVgf3v7BtghhR4gRArA6AJ9OosKCQ0aPNNGP3DvZ4UFoZth+MACfc3IN ZCk2V+nbKDTiIT2D5o/KUSs= =hLFX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=_mooncougar.garjasp.com-11284-1110792229-0001-2-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list