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 1RPlLx-0000Gu-Kd for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 01:28:53 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E2EE421C08D; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 01:28:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D09221C022 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 01:28:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.178.22] (p548D2251.dip.t-dialin.net [84.141.34.81]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: tommy) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E2D431B4012 for ; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 01:28:07 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4EC06E9D.4060803@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 02:27:57 +0100 From: Thomas Sachau User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20111108 Firefox/7.0.1 SeaMonkey/2.4.1 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] have portage be quiet by default References: <4EB4FA98.3080201@gentoo.org> <4EBD42EE.4060104@gentoo.org> <4EBEF208.5060500@gentoo.org> <201111121840.16686.vapier@gentoo.org> <4EBFBA75.3030500@gentoo.org> <1321188262-sup-4513@raeviah> <4EBFCD5D.3080807@gentoo.org> <1321194595-sup-8983@raeviah> <4EBFE727.8000903@gentoo.org> <4EC02CC0.9080907@gentoo.org> <4EC04E11.3060500@gentoo.org> <4EC0559C.4020806@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <4EC0559C.4020806@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.3 OpenPGP: id=211CA2D4 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enigDAAD2E647A486513018AD14E" X-Archives-Salt: 7a83b2c6-511d-4fcc-850f-7e96f36ab343 X-Archives-Hash: 99ad9e86bd1238305697847f59fb0253 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enigDAAD2E647A486513018AD14E Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Zac Medico schrieb: > On 11/13/2011 03:09 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote: >> Zac Medico schrieb: >>> On 11/13/2011 07:49 AM, Thomas Sachau wrote: >>>> Please give me a good reason, why i should by default do more things= (adding quiet-build=3Dn to the >>>> default emerge opts or searching for and opening the build.log) and = what i or others do get from >>>> that. And less lines on the screen is no added value for me, it remo= ves value. >>> >>> Why should we expose new users to legacy defaults that are useless to= >>> more than 99% users, when they would most likely prefer the >>> --quiet-build display? >> >> Why should we change the default behaviour for existing users? Those, = who dont want to see it, >> probably already use --jobs or quiet-build=3Dy. For the rest, they eit= her dont know about those >> options (which does not get better, if some default behaviour changes)= or they dont want those >> options (in which case you force them to change their configuration/sc= ripts/way to do things). >=20 > When we change defaults, it affects everyone who hasn't yet overridden > the setting in EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS. That's just how it is. So you have no problem changing the expected behaviour for the existing u= ser, who already got used to the output or adjusted it themselves and might even rely on the verbos= e output? Additionally i have not seen any message from portage telling me about this change, so m= ost users wont know, what changed or how to revert the change... I would at least expect some longer waiting period in the "discussion" be= fore doing such changes or presenting some real numbers before doing such change. >=20 >> Additionally, do you have any numbers about existing or new users and = about the percentage, which >> would like the build output to be quiet? >=20 > All I have is the feedback from this mailing list, an my own intuition.= > My intuition says that --quiet-build is reasonable default that the > silent majority of people will welcome. >=20 >> Otherwise i see such lines as guess and could say the same >> about the exact opposite view ;-) >=20 > Well, my interpretation of this thread says that the response is > overwhelmingly positive, but I could be biased. ;) You are obviously biased, since you prefer the quiet output. ;-) The numbers of commenting people in here are way too low to say anything,= but there is obviously no big majority for either side, which implies to me, that such a change sho= uld not have been done in the first place and should be reverted. And just for the record: If i am not responding during the next 14 (timef= rame between suggestion and implementation) or more hours, this does not mean, that i changed my mind= , it just means, that i have also other things to do ;-) --------------enigDAAD2E647A486513018AD14E Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iJwEAQECAAYFAk7AbqIACgkQG7kqcTWJkGfWiQQAoRjecUkSHOWDkECMgnM9OKzs xuSILZl+V/ok+HvnT3gajAv3U/cyt7uN8fEi1pwdHPFWDZJ7H7ISiWzQZUMYcxKH Dlq18wXLr6VvA58YNju5xlcUC6l5XVkFZYkH3vZFnUdHwj8JV89XH3pvKHbdrupp b3fnAuAms+1cU9KPS1Q= =l1DI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enigDAAD2E647A486513018AD14E--