Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Revisiting GLEP 81 (acct-*) policies (reviews, cross-distro syncing)

["Michał Górny" <mgorny@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1783 bytes --]

On Tue, 2019-12-10 at 18:13 +0200, Joonas Niilola wrote:
> On 12/10/19 3:34 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > The problem: There is still no any official documentation about using
> > > acct-, and reviewing it was/is pretty much left on the shoulders of one
> > > man. It's easy to say on hindsight it was implemented too quickly.
> > There is official documentation in devmanual [1].
> 
> The _detailed_ one was pushed 2 hours before I made my post, if that's
> what you're referencing now.
> 
> https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/devmanual.git/commit/?id=9613e9e69ae16e6981f90135f92811ded641b52c
> 
> How could I have missed it? But yes, it's exactly and finally what was
> needed for a long time.

No, I was referring to the short one.  But yes, this one is better.

> 
> 
> > Hence my idea that if we stop requiring mailing list RFC, we can replace
> > that with obligatory update to uid-gid.txt.  It should work good enough
> > for synchronization.
> 
> Mmm, yeah sure, I guess it works better for everyone. I can still
> imagine someone pushing acct- ebuilds with colliding UIDs, but at least
> the CI checks for duplicates right? So committer should receive a mail
> to change their numbers ASAP right?

Yes.

>  While at least with mailing list RFC
> there's a small chance it can be prevented (like was done twice last
> week), but the process is indeed more annoying and more manual.
> 

I wouldn't really call it 'prevented'.  Sure, somebody caught it
in time, and the other party noticed it in time.  However, if we remove
the waiting period related to reviews, the risk of collision is much
smaller.

That said, I need to add some pkgchecks for missync between uid-gid.txt
and acct-* packages.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 618 bytes --]