From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E866C15ACFB for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2023 19:31:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D5E8EE0858; Wed, 26 Apr 2023 19:31:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [IPv6:2001:470:ea4a:1:5054:ff:fec7:86e4]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 945C7E05C1 for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2023 19:31:14 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <7153177d-94fb-95b6-9154-fa1d0864a756@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 21:31:10 +0200 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 X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.10.0 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: EGO_SUM To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <49ce8700-6c96-9360-51cf-2a989f666752@gentoo.org> <29b2aa18-7498-ad42-757e-fdebad9fa5a5@gentoo.org> <87o7nd58by.fsf@gentoo.org> Content-Language: en-US, nl-NL From: Andrew Ammerlaan Organization: Gentoo Linux In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: b69d6b95-74b5-4088-8f3e-ad6b8bc4a201 X-Archives-Hash: f7bae1dff1bcbf22ce3229601487ff04 On 26/04/2023 18:12, Matt Turner wrote: > On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 11:31 AM Florian Schmaus wrote: >> The discussion would be more productive if someone who is supporting the >> EGO_SUM deprecation could rationally summarize the main arguments why we >> deprecated EGO_SUM. > > You're requesting the changes. It's on you to read the previous > threads and try to understand. It's not others' responsibilities to > justify the status quo to you, but tl;dr is Manifest files grew to > insane sizes for golang packages with many dependencies, and the > Manifest size is a cost all Gentoo users pay regardless of whether > they use the package. > This is a valid point and I think it is clear. What is not clear however is why the EGO_SUM method should be dropped entirely instead of keeping it as an option for overlays (with an appropriate warning). As I remember this is where the discussion got 'stuck' last time. There are other cases where things are possible but prohibited in ::gentoo by policy. E.g. the acct-user eclass allows setting ACCT_USER_ID to -1 for dynamic assignment, but we do not allow this in ::gentoo. I don't see why we could not do the same for EGO_SUM, keep it as an option, while disallowing it in ::gentoo. This way ridiculously large manifests are gone out of ::gentoo. But overlays can still use the EGO_SUM method for their go packages if a tarball is too much of a hassle. And everyone is happy. It is then the responsibility of the overlay maintainers to ensure that their manifests don't grow out of hand. A warning from the eclass and/or pkgcheck should ensure that they are aware of the potential problem. What am I missing? I truly do not understand why this matter is not resolved already and why we continue to have this discussion again and again. The solution just seems so simple. Best regards, Andrew