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 7960B15808B for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 20:00:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7724C2BC004; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 20:00:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ed1-x536.google.com (mail-ed1-x536.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::536]) (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 0E802E0973 for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 20:00:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ed1-x536.google.com with SMTP id t1so8198770edc.3 for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 12:00:09 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gentoo-org.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=8BnmvWLquskPF2nxQdcNlXVsgICWeTpJ5ZbxE17cwf8=; b=wYCz7xZ9ObAY6JW13eC50iRkTk5Dt9/Y8t/Bp7lt00EU3wQGHEt8fJ01foRot4rIg1 HhbRwdo5fviVfOzF0+C1D09tM9kbwoMpiJqCS4GzooVUoWBCQo8mxP+YOWNH6yzf3ywF /nLAfyEyWqaai4qRztd1ZO+Fb2RQAAgHb4G02C27mrbd/9fE7/0JnCTCNKa7Z/XR6VUa wOeUIz3tcPkvnwHox+yF9k2BRaDXVoCF7T75cKOh2/qi4NBtjI7+bPCMAq6m4FjMfXIg NaU5rjUPRJ+UkqGjxh3maV1LNUIyav0yNvZAFpIOnMTY4rG3D1irlbOZ0RznRo2PJueH t23g== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=8BnmvWLquskPF2nxQdcNlXVsgICWeTpJ5ZbxE17cwf8=; b=RZMOuK2oewoRHSn8VqCw2S2jRnGM+MPY/TBFoS8qAXhSXhibLemLuMGUxnOhuqcf5k 7Th5eTOqSoVuDqidjYz7As0ev09dybvQNxA2cdyr82YMaIUxOh3YaJeUEDX0D+ruXaC9 v2MKnHh1poJ8Athd8VGDTSIKhBkdQaZguP+Zqnw6LfFRQzQ7bDWtoXotNK0LdD8HV5zK ZtI5jGdOXYcr5UoOfWaAJkHKtSDaxyHlp/t8l+YF9ZHiQrHo1xJK7CfG92yoxdfmTiNI Tnw30RsazH97MOvn3x6Q//nJI2RQKmEzHraTlMt7FCW5nhNMjeMrhcvyvQjlbVk9yvvV fmJQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530Dh2HaFMWLoJSMpJO9/JKy2KfVzOBgmyzB6KgKhTKZOihaTXfI yOPB/2L0Brg4SmTb59d+JsNC9NKL2A6Zh3exp0c27E639MBk7A== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxiXfxKyR8GnX5HdT4ob8uUQexjU8sKSTcYsMZUh9VaJi8HHmkINkqLEjLDfE19EfGpmgMwzv1e78ViSu/s0D4= X-Received: by 2002:aa7:d80f:0:b0:410:d5c3:f770 with SMTP id v15-20020aa7d80f000000b00410d5c3f770mr5953221edq.279.1646942408433; Thu, 10 Mar 2022 12:00:08 -0800 (PST) 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 References: <87k0d2x0wy.fsf@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: From: Alec Warner Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2022 11:59:57 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Deprecating repoman To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: 2cae06d4-633d-4e7a-b9a0-05f842a7e1be X-Archives-Hash: 0ce0943b6e25f28ecca680568e66f305 On Thu, Mar 10, 2022 at 10:28 AM Joshua Kinard wrote: > > On 3/9/2022 16:47, Matt Turner wrote: > > On Wed, Mar 9, 2022 at 1:37 PM Matthias Maier wrote: > >> > >> > >> Just a quick though: > >> > >> Looking at the man page of repoman it doesn't look to difficult to > >> replicate the behavior with pkgcheck. Meaning, we could think of > >> creating a drop-in replacement for "repoman [full]" (which would just > >> call pkgcheck) and "repoman commit" which actually does much more than > >> just prepending the git commit summary line: repoman commit does > >> > >> - update the manifest > >> - bail out if files are not correctly "git add"ed > >> - add the output of [pkgcheck] as a comment to the git commit > >> description > > > > I wouldn't block anyone from doing this, but it's not something I'm > > personally interested in pursuing. I see very little value here. > > First, you're trying to justify replacing repoman on an entirely subjective > opinion of "I think is superior", then when you get feedback on the > idea, you dismiss that feedback with more opinion. > > Why do you not see value here? The actions described are actually quite a > few useful steps in the process of checking a change into the tree. If you > expect developers to do those steps on their own, that increases, not > decreases, the chances of making a mistake. Or are these steps already > handled by one of the other scripts in the replacement packages you propose? > If so, please say so and identify which one(s). > > My opinion is that any tool that replaces repoman should, at a minimum, > replace like functionality with like functionality, plus benefits or > enhancements. This looks more like a step backwards, not a step forwards. I'd be interested in hearing your workflow, so we can capture it in the table (mentioned earlier) so its clear how your existing workflow will work with the new tools (or perhaps there is a gap, or we need to craft / add additional tools?) I agree on the face it may not be obvious what workflows look like. -A > > -- > Joshua Kinard > Gentoo/MIPS > kumba@gentoo.org > rsa6144/5C63F4E3F5C6C943 2015-04-27 > 177C 1972 1FB8 F254 BAD0 3E72 5C63 F4E3 F5C6 C943 > > "The past tempts us, the present confuses us, the future frightens us. And > our lives slip away, moment by moment, lost in that vast, terrible in-between." > > --Emperor Turhan, Centauri Republic >