From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NV64l-0004Dj-Dx for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:28:07 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 22E6EE0848; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:27:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vms173013pub.verizon.net (vms173013pub.verizon.net [206.46.173.13]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E6FAE0848 for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 16:27:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from gw.thefreemanclan.net ([unknown] [96.245.54.62]) by vms173013.mailsrvcs.net (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 7u2-7.02 32bit (built Apr 16 2009)) with ESMTPA id <0KW7005KV1PH9EK1@vms173013.mailsrvcs.net> for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 10:27:17 -0600 (CST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gw.thefreemanclan.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 427FC1759FDD for ; Wed, 13 Jan 2010 11:27:17 -0500 (EST) Message-id: <4B4DF464.8090004@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 11:27:16 -0500 From: Richard Freeman User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091229 Thunderbird/3.0 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 MIME-version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Last rites: net-nntp/inn References: <201001112305.16532.hwoarang@gentoo.org> <201001121533.08479.vapier@gentoo.org> <4B4CE0D0.9070207@gentoo.org> <201001130924.33139.vapier@gentoo.org> In-reply-to: <201001130924.33139.vapier@gentoo.org> Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 862079ea-b170-40af-8374-08abebe9766e X-Archives-Hash: 9787c8547e295ecb869bb5c0b31d9072 On 01/13/2010 09:24 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Tuesday 12 January 2010 15:51:28 Tom=C3=A1=C5=A1 Chv=C3=A1tal wrote: >> And since WE want to enable as-needed as default at some time we need = to >> work on the bugs > > which isnt going to happen This isn't really intended to point fingers at anybody in particular - I=20 haven't personally investigated the complexity of fixing the as-needed=20 issue for this particular package. I think that logging as-needed bugs is certainly a value-add. I think that tracking a blocker for as-needed is a value-add. However, if we want to turn as-needed into a QA issue and try to enforce=20 it, I think that this should really be run past the council and=20 documented. It wouldn't hurt to also document tips for solving the=20 problem and the proper way to mask as-needed if it just isn't going to=20 work (even if we make as-needed the default that doesn't mean that we=20 can't mask it if we have to). I think that devs should make good-faith efforts to fix as-needed=20 issues, but if the problem is with the overall upstream design and major=20 work is involved, that is an UPSTREAM problem. Sure, it is nice if=20 somebody wants to be an upstream contributor and fix their problems for=20 them, but I'm not sure that it is worth the Gentoo resources in every=20 single case. Maybe for system packages or common dependencies we might=20 push a little harder. In any case, when this kind of controversy exists the best solution is=20 to make a proposal and ask the council to render a decision. It isn't=20 productive to have battles on the mailing list about whether something=20 should or shouldn't be policy. I don't mean to suggest that QA or treecleaners or whatever absolutely=20 must run everything they do past the council. However, when we run into=20 genuine disagreements between projects/herds/devs that is the ultimate=20 escalation path. Package mask is not a very good way to try to hit devs with a cluestick=20 anyway - the main victims of this sort of approach tend to be the users.