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 6BBC415800D for ; Sat, 8 Jul 2023 20:50:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D8475E093D; Sat, 8 Jul 2023 20:50:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (woodpecker.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (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 8A78EE092F for ; Sat, 8 Jul 2023 20:50:14 +0000 (UTC) References: <2ZKWN4KF.MKEFFMWE.LGPKYP47@RTL7EJXF.RN4PF6UF.MDFBGF3C> <87y1k33aoy.fsf@gentoo.org> <5b5e5a30-6fcc-7a9d-6c91-67d9a6a5c560@gentoo.org> <87jzvl2vzh.fsf@gentoo.org> <52703145-a284-30f3-aac8-69ed086a5f4a@gentoo.org> <20230706060918.GA10569@tachikoma> User-agent: mu4e 1.10.4; emacs 29.0.92 From: Sam James To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] EGO_SUM (was: [gentoo-project] Gentoo Council Election 202306 ... Nominations Open in Just Over 24 Hours.) Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2023 21:49:49 +0100 In-reply-to: <20230706060918.GA10569@tachikoma> Message-ID: <877craf7r2.fsf@gentoo.org> 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 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 78468ebb-1805-44bb-bdf3-50b81f6e914d X-Archives-Hash: 83f8f6dfb868834674760c660fd47936 --=-=-= Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Zoltan Puskas writes: > On Tue, Jul 04, 2023 at 01:13:30AM -0600, Tim Harder wrote: >> On 2023-07-03 Mon 04:17, Florian Schmaus wrote: >> >On 30/06/2023 13.33, Eray Aslan wrote: >> >>On Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 03:38:11AM -0600, Tim Harder wrote: >> >>>Why do we have to keep exporting the related variables that generally >> >>>cause these size issues to the environment? >> >> >> >>I really do not want to make a +1 response but this is an excellent >> >>question that we need to answer before implementing EGO_SUM. >> > >> >Could you please discuss why you make the reintroduction of EGO_SUM=20 >> >dependent on this question? >>=20 >> Just to be clear, I don't particularly care about EGO_SUM enough to gate >> its reintroduction (and don't have any leverage to do so anyway). I'm >> just tired of the circular discussions around env issues that all seem >> to avoid actual fixes, catering instead to functionality used by a >> vanishingly small subset of ebuilds in the main repo that compels a >> certain design mostly due to how portage functioned before EAPI 0. >>=20 >> Other than that, supporting EGO_SUM (or any other language ecosystem >> trending towards distro-unfriendly releases) is fine as long as devs are >> cognizant how the related global-scope eclass design affects everyone >> running or working on the raw repo. I hope devs continue leveraging the >> relatively recent benchmark tooling (and perhaps more future support) to >> improve their work. Along those lines, it could be nice to see sample >> benchmark data in commit messages for large, global-scope eclass work >> just to reinforce that it was taken into account. >>=20 >> Tim >>=20 > > I've been following the EGO_SUM thread for quite some time now. One other= thing > I did not see mentioned in favour of EGO_SUM so far: reproducibility. > > The problem with external tarballs is that they are gone once the ebuild = is > dropped from the tree. Should a user ever want to roll back to a previous > version of an application, either by checking out on older version of the > portage tree or copying said ebuild into their local overlay, they still = cannot > simply run an emerge on the it as they have to somehow recreate the tarba= ll > itself too. I believe Hank's email coves this. --=-=-= Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iOUEARYKAI0WIQQlpruI3Zt2TGtVQcJzhAn1IN+RkAUCZKnMAl8UgAAAAAAuAChp c3N1ZXItZnByQG5vdGF0aW9ucy5vcGVucGdwLmZpZnRoaG9yc2VtYW4ubmV0MjVB NkJCODhERDlCNzY0QzZCNTU0MUMyNzM4NDA5RjUyMERGOTE5MA8cc2FtQGdlbnRv by5vcmcACgkQc4QJ9SDfkZD3OAEA7Q/Qs/YW94caiNvfE8YcWF7mnR0jK9ri0Nk4 qaQYaGcA/0o9JGNfvgPUVS1p4lk7/vzetmIX/rx0+mWQLrLpuCcG =kEGi -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-=-=--