[gentoo-dev] new profiles.desc header documenting profile/keyword policy

[gentoo-dev] new profiles.desc header documenting profile/keyword policy

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1484 bytes --]

this has all been fairly ad-hoc in the past, so formalize it in the one place
that impacts everyone -- profiles.desc.
-mike

###############################################################################
# This is a list of valid profiles for each architecture.  This file is used by
# repoman when doing a repoman scan or repoman full.
#
# DO NOT ADD PROFILES WITH A "die" or "exit" IN THEM OR IT KILLS REPOMAN.
#
# Policy statement; updates should be posted to gentoo-dev mailing list.
#
# The meaning of the status field:
#   stable - Fully supported profile; needs dedicated arch team to keep up with
#            stabilization (if using stable KEYWORDS) and keyword requests.
#   dev    - Ideally on track to becoming "stable"; KEYWORDS breakage should be
#            kept to a minimum and bug reports are recommended.
#   exp    - Developers may ignore breakage in these profiles.  It is up to the
#            profile maintainer to keep things viable, but it is not a hard
#            requirement that the deptree stay error free.
# Stable keywords may be used with any of these types.  If an arch only has exp
# profiles, then other developers may ignore that keyword when doing upgrades
# and cleaning out old versions (dropping of stable/unstable KEYWORDS).
#
# Note: Please do not mix tabs & spaces.  Look at surrounding lines first.
#
# File Layout (for exact format, see the portage(5) man page):
#arch           profile_directory                               status

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] new profiles.desc header documenting profile/keyword policy

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 594 bytes --]

On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 02:23:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> this has all been fairly ad-hoc in the past, so formalize it in the one place
> that impacts everyone -- profiles.desc.
> -mike

If it is policy, shouldn't it go in the dev manual rather than in this
file?

Given that, I have questions:

There are several situations in profiles.desk where one profile is dev
but some profiles that inherit it are exp, for example, the arm
profiles.

Which rule applies in this scenario?

Also, from a maintainer's pov, what is the difference between stable and
dev profiles?

Thanks,

William


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] new profiles.desc header documenting profile/keyword policy

[Alexander Berntsen]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

On 20/01/14 18:26, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 02:23:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> this has all been fairly ad-hoc in the past, so formalize it in
>> the one place that impacts everyone -- profiles.desc.
> If it is policy, shouldn't it go in the dev manual rather than in 
> this file?
profiles.desc is installed on a user's system. Users don't read the
dev manual.

- -- 
Alexander
alexander@plaimi.net
http://plaimi.net/~alexander
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iF4EAREIAAYFAlLdaIYACgkQRtClrXBQc7VyeAD/SR7s5Y0wOHUalxN4M/bxpYYA
omlg8ds+c5clH9+L/qEA/jvdeYhU+At8LH4vGYm9XmjrqpAuymTDK/kf81Cmpl7x
=/DUk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] new profiles.desc header documenting profile/keyword policy

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 830 bytes --]

On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 07:18:46PM +0100, Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA256
> 
> On 20/01/14 18:26, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 02:23:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> this has all been fairly ad-hoc in the past, so formalize it in
> >> the one place that impacts everyone -- profiles.desc.
> > If it is policy, shouldn't it go in the dev manual rather than in 
> > this file?
> profiles.desc is installed on a user's system. Users don't read the
> dev manual.

All policies are being documented in the dev manual, so I was just
saying that I think this should go there if it is going to be official.

Whether or not it is in a local file (on the users' system) isn't
relevant, developers should be familiar with the dev manual.

William


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] new profiles.desc header documenting profile/keyword policy

[Markos Chandras]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 01/20/2014 06:54 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 07:18:46PM +0100, Alexander Berntsen
> wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256
>> 
>> On 20/01/14 18:26, William Hubbs wrote:
>>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 02:23:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger
>>> wrote:
>>>> this has all been fairly ad-hoc in the past, so formalize it
>>>> in the one place that impacts everyone -- profiles.desc.
>>> If it is policy, shouldn't it go in the dev manual rather than
>>> in this file?
>> profiles.desc is installed on a user's system. Users don't read
>> the dev manual.
> 
> All policies are being documented in the dev manual, so I was just 
> saying that I think this should go there if it is going to be
> official.
> 
> Whether or not it is in a local file (on the users' system) isn't 
> relevant, developers should be familiar with the dev manual.
> 
> William
> 
There is no profiles.desc documentation in devmanual

http://devmanual.gentoo.org/profiles/profiles.desc/index.html

Discussing this in gentoo-dev makes no sense. Whoever wants the
profiles.desc to be part of the devmanual document, please submit a patch.

- -- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
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=UwDV
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] new profiles.desc header documenting profile/keyword policy

[Tom Wijsman]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 19:40:09 +0000
Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Discussing this in gentoo-dev makes no sense. Whoever wants the
> profiles.desc to be part of the devmanual document, please submit a
> patch.

This confuses me, as vapier is trying to formalize it we are discussing
whether this is policy; see WilliamH questioning it as well as asking
further questions about it, so, I think further discussion is necessary.

- -- 
With kind regards,

Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer

E-mail address  : TomWij@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key  : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2  ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS3o3ZAAoJEJWyH81tNOV9cPcH+gNyvuDSNDu8wkRS0incRIW1
fdgtguAPTbJc7XQzyz9pERqrwVyarNoX0i1ToJWtC+8KY41J7SAd0gKy3VfPQRQN
MpkWqqWKKS9dQ2vMsj7FvAlylLVHXe/tiM0HCb6CsLr2uUBD6NpAH85qOCZgY8wN
m0LPh1Brgb1A9LR8ISeOkJGGsLGTu6oXiyjHWV3HbmI6tFJ2oSp+RqCMXCEj48jp
DEedsrpqrC7KE29ylrff4+audTyc4a/TMGnARal3nuhnt4PG15n6QcFKJNbuSUoT
X4AHJpUqnfmq4mSo/uelVS6Jvu+WzUUAU2JUEuTKZQldz4NnG7bo0nThu0aZi5U=
=dPK8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-dev] new profiles.desc header documenting profile/keyword policy

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 552 bytes --]

On Monday 20 January 2014 13:18:46 Alexander Berntsen wrote:
> On 20/01/14 18:26, William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 02:23:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> >> this has all been fairly ad-hoc in the past, so formalize it in
> >> the one place that impacts everyone -- profiles.desc.
> > 
> > If it is policy, shouldn't it go in the dev manual rather than in
> > this file?
> 
> profiles.desc is installed on a user's system. Users don't read the
> dev manual.

users don't care.  this file concerns developers only.
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] new profiles.desc header documenting profile/keyword policy

[Tom Wijsman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 735 bytes --]

On Mon, 20 Jan 2014 11:26:13 -0600
William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:

> If it is policy, shouldn't it go in the dev manual rather than in this
> file?

From a QA perspective, it would be nice to have the policy documentation
available in both locations; but as duplication would create out of date
copies, I suggest at the very least that we perhaps add a link that
refers to the devmanual page in the profiles.desc header. Maybe we can
make this more common practice in the future if people like the idea...

-- 
With kind regards,

Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer

E-mail address  : TomWij@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key  : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2  ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] new profiles.desc header documenting profile/keyword policy

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 2149 bytes --]

On Monday 20 January 2014 12:26:13 William Hubbs wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 02:23:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > this has all been fairly ad-hoc in the past, so formalize it in the one
> > place that impacts everyone -- profiles.desc.
> 
> If it is policy, shouldn't it go in the dev manual rather than in this
> file?

maybe.  devmanual doesn't talk about this file at all atm.

or maybe i still have it in my head that devmanual.g.o is the ad-hoc 
documentation and not a policy manual -- policy lives in the Gentoo Developer 
Handbook.

> There are several situations in profiles.desk where one profile is dev
> but some profiles that inherit it are exp, for example, the arm
> profiles.
> 
> Which rule applies in this scenario?

both.  when you run `repoman`, it isn't just checking for $ARCH and ~$ARCH 
consistency.  it is doing that for every single profile (one of the reasons 
repoman is slow -- every time we add a profile, that's another dependency tree 
repoman needs to check).  when people say "the dependency tree for $ARCH is 
broken", there's a qualifier in there that people rarely include.  the dep tree 
*for a specific profile* is broken.  usually breakage covers them all, but since 
things like use.mask and package.use.mask and package.mask are done on a per-
profile basis, it's not that uncommon for the breakage to hit a subset of 
profiles.

that means package maintainers are allowed to break exp profiles.  they should 
avoid breaking dev profiles, but they can fall back to filing bugs for the 
profile maintainers (which usually means the $ARCH maintainer).

the quick rule of thumb in terms of "what do package maintainers need to care 
about for $ARCH", then look at it in terms of "what is the best profile 
available for $ARCH".

> Also, from a maintainer's pov, what is the difference between stable and
> dev profiles?

for package maintainers, you get smacked if you break "stable" profiles because 
that's what the majority of users have selected.  if you break a "dev" profile, 
that's not a huge deal as people know things are "in progress".
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] new profiles.desc header documenting profile/keyword policy

[Tom Wijsman]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1860 bytes --]

On Wed, 22 Jan 2014 01:58:04 -0500
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Monday 20 January 2014 12:26:13 William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 02:23:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > this has all been fairly ad-hoc in the past, so formalize it in
> > > the one place that impacts everyone -- profiles.desc.
> > 
> > If it is policy, shouldn't it go in the dev manual rather than in
> > this file?
> 
> maybe.  devmanual doesn't talk about this file at all atm.
> 
> or maybe i still have it in my head that devmanual.g.o is the ad-hoc 
> documentation and not a policy manual -- policy lives in the Gentoo
> Developer Handbook.

Parts of the policies at the end of the Gentoo Developer Handbook have
migrated to the development manual over the last week.

Those whom maintain it regard it as policy (qa@g.o, devmanual@g.o) as
far as I know, I have in the past also regarded it as such; to some
extent documentation should be based on policy, thus as a result I
think you can trust the documentation to be policy to a good extent.

The real policy is where the decisions are made, but as that's spread
across the council summaries and the mailing lists; that is what harder
to find I guess, with the ebuild policy now merging into the development
manual I think we really should see the development manual as policy.

The policy at the back of the Gentoo Developer Handbook was incomplete,
slightly outdated (CVS part, maybe some other unnoticed differences),
rarely came up in discussions (people often refer to devmanual
instead), ... thus I think its migration to the devmanual is progress.

-- 
With kind regards,

Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer

E-mail address  : TomWij@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key  : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2  ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] new profiles.desc header documenting profile/keyword policy

[Markos Chandras]

On 01/22/2014 06:58 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Monday 20 January 2014 12:26:13 William Hubbs wrote:
>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 02:23:24AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>>> this has all been fairly ad-hoc in the past, so formalize it in the one
>>> place that impacts everyone -- profiles.desc.
>>
>> If it is policy, shouldn't it go in the dev manual rather than in this
>> file?
> 
> maybe.  devmanual doesn't talk about this file at all atm.
> 
> or maybe i still have it in my head that devmanual.g.o is the ad-hoc 
> documentation and not a policy manual -- policy lives in the Gentoo Developer 
> Handbook.

The handbook has not been updated for a good number of years therefore I
am moving bits from it to devmanual whenever I have the time.

-- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras