From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7513E1381F3 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 11:56:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F0EAEE0A97; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 11:56:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ia0-f179.google.com (mail-ia0-f179.google.com [209.85.210.179]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 04D23E0A43 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 11:56:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ia0-f179.google.com with SMTP id p22so1343242iad.24 for ; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 04:56:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:reply-to:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=7BBoIfjTGW63U2D+zYoKzolaU7jmlLJo2noOp0E71+0=; b=WmEpp8AS2r8R1GOO4PbCqlg9B1X48Ndgn3GYJtIVtlzmjQOhaTUfn/wxiCA0lrQs0+ wRfJKS5a9v9uOgDsKXKzD+Z2CYDCgieyKI2eYitmPe52N4x7aPJ17eYnakBcSgIkX95d Ags0+BG+GAMEipiAwrSVwjxvtdr299c3BLvxWriFyek8LRwqt0TQp3IrJcTzUFkv0pNp E/aLnL950eimPsbCHTSwsK+ApDoAhgVJFSklwEY90RiF+3y0yYSgU5oWsmWzuIk7R4cO pl0HloSKfkUfo+noPR2xm4j2OtD05ZNWUdn7hI33oSmvDvB3MAriAMOPg7yWoBFBcHsB eBug== 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 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.51.226 with SMTP id n2mr7948383igo.25.1366631809288; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 04:56:49 -0700 (PDT) Sender: yngwin@gmail.com Received: by 10.64.30.234 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Apr 2013 04:56:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130421165958.370a3b63@portable> References: <20130419091632.D01152171D@flycatcher.gentoo.org> <20130419153043.30ffc50c@portable> <20130421165958.370a3b63@portable> Date: Mon, 22 Apr 2013 19:56:49 +0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 4qsTGBy5Umzy6ajt4vAp6Jior7g Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in profiles: ChangeLog package.mask From: Ben de Groot To: Alexis Ballier Cc: gentoo-dev Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae9340745880f7f04daf1c346 X-Archives-Salt: 21927564-66fc-4596-a325-fef335e8f3d4 X-Archives-Hash: 05f97b02aaae50284c1e89b00b8421ac --14dae9340745880f7f04daf1c346 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On 21 April 2013 22:59, Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 20:53:28 +0800 > Ben de Groot wrote: > > > On 19 April 2013 21:30, Alexis Ballier wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 09:16:32 +0000 (UTC) > > > "Ben de Groot (yngwin)" wrote: > > > > > > > Index: package.mask > > > > =================================================================== > > > > RCS file: /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/profiles/package.mask,v > > > > retrieving revision 1.14667 > > > > retrieving revision 1.14668 > > > > diff -u -r1.14667 -r1.14668 > > > > --- package.mask 19 Apr 2013 06:20:50 -0000 1.14667 > > > > +++ package.mask 19 Apr 2013 09:16:32 -0000 1.14668 > > > [...] > > > > @@ -133,6 +133,7 @@ > > > > # Non-maintainer ebuild with experimental multilib features > > > > # masked for further testing > > > > =media-libs/freetype-2.4.11-r2 > > > > +=media-libs/fontconfig-2.10.2-r1 > > > > > > > > > > Is there any real reason behind this mask I may have missed ? > > > > > > This ebuild, with multilib features, was committed without my consent, > > while I am the de facto maintainer of freetype and fontconfig (other > > devs in fonts herd are inactive). I don't want to deal with bug > > reports because of this. > > Fair enough, but there is a lack of coordination there (who started the > mess is irrelevant), leaving as only choices: unmask ft/fc or mask a > good part of the multilib x11 stuff. The current situation is broken. > I agree it is broken. I'm trying to do my part for the packages I maintain. In my opinion all the recent multilib stuff should be masked, but I don't maintain those other (x11) packages. So you may want to handle it in a different way. > I suppose you talked with Michal about this and couldn't reach an > agreement, like him joining the fonts herd, or at least the mail alias > to monitor ft/fc bugs. > > If you want I can join the fonts herd also, I already have a foot in > there for some small packages used within texlive anyway. > We could certainly use a hand in fonts herd. Most members have left or are on extended non-active status. It's just lu_zero (and I am not sure how active he is wrt fonts packages, but it certainly doesn't cover freetype and fontconfig) and me. > And I'd rather see this developed in an overlay instead, as I have > > said before. We also need more consensus on this multilib approach > > before I am happy to support this. > > I believe we reached consensus last time. Also, I believe we are at the > step "it is mature enough to give it a wide ~arch testing"; otherwise > we may just repeat multilib-portage history and have it in an overlay > for several years to never give it wide adoption in the end. > Maybe I missed something, but I haven't seen anything like that. Can you point me to those discussions? -- Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin --14dae9340745880f7f04daf1c346 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On 2= 1 April 2013 22:59, Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org> w= rote:
On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 20:53:= 28 +0800
Ben de Groot <yngwin@gentoo.org= > wrote:

> On 19 April 2013 21:30, Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 19 Apr 2013 09:16:32 +0000 (UTC)
> > "Ben de Groot (yngwin)" <yngwin@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Index: package.mask
> > > =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
> > > RCS file: /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/profiles/package.mask,v > > > retrieving revision 1.14667
> > > retrieving revision 1.14668
> > > diff -u -r1.14667 -r1.14668
> > > --- package.mask =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A019 Apr 2013 06:20:50 -0= 000 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A01.14667
> > > +++ package.mask =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A019 Apr 2013 09:16:32 -0= 000 =C2=A0 =C2=A0 =C2=A01.14668
> > [...]
> > > @@ -133,6 +133,7 @@
> > > =C2=A0# Non-maintainer ebuild with experimental multilib fea= tures
> > > =C2=A0# masked for further testing
> > > =C2=A0=3Dmedia-libs/freetype-2.4.11-r2
> > > +=3Dmedia-libs/fontconfig-2.10.2-r1
> > >
> >
> > Is there any real reason behind this mask I may have missed ?
>
>
> This ebuild, with multilib features, was committed without my consent,=
> while I am the de facto maintainer of freetype and fontconfig (other > devs in fonts herd are inactive). I don't want to deal with bug > reports because of this.

Fair enough, but there is a lack of coordination there (who started t= he
mess is irrelevant), leaving as only choices: unmask ft/fc or mask a
good part of the multilib x11 stuff. The current situation is broken.

I agree it is broken. I'm trying to do m= y part for the packages I maintain.
In my opinion all the rec= ent multilib stuff should be masked, but I don't
maintain those other (x11) packages. So you may want to handle it in
a d= ifferent way.
=C2=A0
I suppose you talked with Michal about this and couldn't reach an
agreement, like him joining the fonts herd, or at least the mail alias
to monitor ft/fc bugs.

If you want I can join the fonts herd also, I already have a foot in
there for some small packages used within texlive anyway.

We could certainly use a hand in= fonts herd. Most members have
left or are on extended non-active status= . It's just lu_zero (and I am
not sure how active he is wrt fonts packages, but it certainly d= oesn't
cover freetype and fontconfig) and me.

> And I'd rather see this developed in an overlay instead, as I have=
> said before. We also need more consensus on this multilib approach
> before I am happy to support this.

I believe we reached consensus last time. Also, I believe we are at t= he
step "it is mature enough to give it a wide ~arch testing"; other= wise
we may just repeat multilib-portage history and have it in an overlay
for several years to never give it wide adoption in the end.

Maybe= I missed something, but I haven't seen anything like that.
Can you point me to those discussions?

--
Cheers,

Ben | yngwin
= Gentoo developer
Gentoo Qt project lead, Gentoo Wiki admin
--14dae9340745880f7f04daf1c346--