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 A732413877A for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 15:08:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5AD7FE07F4; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 15:08:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-wi0-f169.google.com (mail-wi0-f169.google.com [209.85.212.169]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EB610E07DD for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 15:08:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id n3so6836040wiv.2 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 08:08:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:reply-to:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=TW+7n/Y5OJIqYcsytK/eLcM/SpCsBl5xFTXdC0aJF50=; b=cZT/8TF6cRDI1zANTJd7bluuhF6J/samp72SIP/cDrvQSeJaIY/Yt1kdJnkjyAxtc/ 1mhfh9ONyzCXYD8PNxJeBVSSY2ddIS8XXEFgF43N448Yu7BTAbH57fa5cQHyI4UgyVCw LGtOdBrp/gNKqDDAZqUx0xbmfSwRt0vDSE06FzZWcLKfefMMS7iFvgQq1y2c2wvzA10b 81PrU6h7gK8y+d8JbbsowSrOcDbBydcDJP6haNk0s0zIGQ5Co+cFMs7rIVVoRnu2Ntsi 149dQGFNzWhO0os3W5TZDxLvGcy5Luf1uxJad7TJ+ja9sWwvDgDTpVPIQMUPgFM/45t/ fxpg== 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 10.180.93.8 with SMTP id cq8mr15605379wib.17.1408547317273; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 08:08:37 -0700 (PDT) Sender: neurogeekster@gmail.com Received: by 10.216.217.12 with HTTP; Wed, 20 Aug 2014 08:08:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20140820084808.5f78c624@archtester.homenetwork> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 11:08:37 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: IJhr1mV_6pNkEtjd8Ea3R5t18iI Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Fw: reviewboard and its bugs From: "Jesus Rivero (Neurogeek)" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d043892b17edaa1050110fad9 X-Archives-Salt: c12f8dd6-c779-40e8-9393-d1988bfcc1ad X-Archives-Hash: e4e8b4efcde8a9413ddb38ba2e0cc5b5 --f46d043892b17edaa1050110fad9 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 I originally responded to another thread. Here is what I said: < I gave this a try some time ago and was bummed down by some things. I dont like nodejs enough, and npm devs seems to not care about centrally/globally installed packages. There are some npm packages that have to be modified so they can work when globally installed and it gets boring after a while. npm packages tend to be really small so one package can have a really high number of deps. If anybody is interested in this, check out my repo with npm packages[0] and a really simple g-npm tool[1] to generate ebuilds for them. These tools might be outdated cause I don't use nodejs anymore and I dont care much about it. Feel free to ping me if you have questions. Cheers, [0] https://github.com/neurogeek/gentoo-overlay (I might have something more recent somewhere) [1] https://github.com/neurogeek/g-npm > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 11:50 PM, Tim Boudreau wrote: > FWIW, I suspect npm is here to stay, and it has a facility for installing > system-wide utilities; and NodeJS is both usable and convenient for > system-level scripting which has no connection to webapps, and has the > ability to build native code that integrates with NodeJS code as well. > > IMO, it would be pretty insane to write packages that duplicate npm > packages; support within portage for installing things with it makes more > sense. I've occasionally toyed with the idea of a webapp that exposes > packages in npm as ebuilds and generates the required metadata on the fly, > so anything in the npm repository would simply *be* a Gentoo package. Not > sure the idea is viable, but it might be. If that existed, and then some > known-stable subset of packages for which system-wide installation is > appropriate could be mirrored in the portage tree, that would probably be > ideal. > > -Tim > > > > On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 8:48 PM, IAN DELANEY wrote: > >> >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 08:45:21 +0800 >> From: IAN DELANEY >> To: gentoo-python@lists.gentoo.org >> Subject: reviewboard and its bugs >> >> cancel the gentoo-python@lists, was intended for gentoo-dev@lists >> >> The package reviewboard has reached a stage of warranting this >> submission to the ML. A simple search of reviewboard in bugzilla lists >> a few 'user submitted' bugs and no less than 3 sec bugs. This package I >> added initially because interest was expressed mainly by my final >> mentor and the other (prior) co-maintainer. Because of changes to >> reviewboard upstream, we need a new eclass and category to cater to >> certain js packages. >> >> Now wishing to re-write all I have already written in the bugs, in >> summary, reviewboard has become unworkable by the developers of >> reviewboard itself going down the path of nodejs. Enter npm. >> npm was an unknown to me until Djblets and django-pipeline ebuilds >> failed due to the absence of UglifyJS and some related js deps. On >> being informed of ebuilds for this and related deps in the overlay of >> neurogeek, I discovered they required npm which it seems comes in >> nodejs. The response drawn by fellow devs over npm is in my limited >> experience unprecedented. The overall reaction was leave it and don't >> go there. What became apparent from the ebulds in neurogeek's overlay >> was that these deps didn't lend themselves well to writing ebuilds for >> them for portage. In the overlay there is in fact an npm eclass to >> overseer their installation into the system. >> >> After some somewhat reluctant discussion of npm in irc, it has at least >> been suggested that the use of nodejs' UglifyJS in django-pipeline >> could be patched out to relieve us all of any reliance or involvement >> of npm to install these js oriented deps. That has not ofcourse been >> attempted or tested and allows for the probability of breaking Djblets >> and or reviewboard which I suspect has been written by reviewboard >> developers to explicitly depend on and call these deps. The decision it >> seems isn't whether to allows npm into portage, it already comes with >> nodejs correct me if I misunderstand. The question is whether to >> support this npm installing packages into a gentoo system by ebuilds >> essentially outside of portage. This requires an eclass and it has >> been suggested a whole new category for portage under which to >> categorise these npm type packages. Such an eclass has already been >> written, however, that it has never been added to portage along with js >> style packages in the overlay, to me at least, strongly suggests the >> author always had reservations with its addition. >> >> There is ofcourse the alternative; to write ebuilds to install these >> packages without npm involvement. This would still require an >> eclass anyway. Either way, nodejs and java script are totally outside >> the realm of pythonic packages and are therefore outside my realm >> of knowledge and experience. Reviewboard developers have essentially >> created a huge dilemma for users of reviewboard in gentoo by going >> electing to use this js 'toolchain'. While I normally go to any >> lengths to maintain any and all packages within the python realm, this >> reviewboard has gone way beyond that realm. Until this, its >> underbelly was pure python and posed no real problem. Now I have a >> growing and unwelcome list of bugs of this package assigned to me as >> the sole remaining maintainer which are now unworkable. >> >> The real problem here is that there is an apparent keen set of would >> be users of this package, one of whom is a gentoo dev, who is to be >> found in at least one of those bugs. To delete or mask the package >> amounts to a clean solution, and also abandons gentoo users looking >> to have the package made work for them. >> >> In summary, because of changes to reviewboard upstream, we need a new >> eclass and category to write ebuilds to these packages and add them to >> portage. >> >> >> >> -- >> kind regards >> >> Ian Delaney >> >> >> -- >> kind regards >> >> Ian Delaney >> >> > > > -- > http://timboudreau.com > -- Jesus Rivero (Neurogeek) Gentoo Developer --f46d043892b17edaa1050110fad9 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I originally responded to another thread. Here is wh= at I said:
<
I gave this a try some time ago and was bummed down by some= things. I dont like nodejs enough, and npm devs seems to not care about ce= ntrally/globally installed packages. There are some npm packages that have = to be modified so they can work when globally installed and it gets boring = after a while. npm packages tend to be really small so one package can have= a really high number of deps.=C2=A0

If anybody is interested in this, check out my repo w= ith npm packages[0] and a really simple g-npm tool[1] to generate ebuilds f= or them. These tools might be outdated cause I don't use nodejs anymore= and I dont care much about it.

Feel free to ping me if you have questions.

Cheers,

[0]=C2=A0https://= github.com/neurogeek/gentoo-overlay=C2=A0(I might have something more r= ecent somewhere)
>
=


On Tue, Aug 1= 9, 2014 at 11:50 PM, Tim Boudreau <niftiness@gmail.com> wr= ote:
FWIW, I suspect npm is here= to stay, and it has a facility for installing system-wide utilities; =C2= =A0and NodeJS is both usable and convenient for system-level scripting whic= h has no connection to webapps, and has the ability to build native code th= at integrates with NodeJS code as well.

IMO, it would be pretty insane to write packages that duplic= ate npm packages; =C2=A0support within portage for installing things with i= t makes more sense. =C2=A0I've occasionally toyed with the idea of a we= bapp that exposes packages in npm as ebuilds and generates the required met= adata on the fly, so anything in the npm repository would simply *be* a Gen= too package. =C2=A0Not sure the idea is viable, but it might be. =C2=A0If t= hat existed, and then some known-stable subset of packages for which system= -wide installation is appropriate could be mirrored in the portage tree, th= at would probably be ideal.

-Tim



On Tue, Aug 19= , 2014 at 8:48 PM, IAN DELANEY <della5@iinet.com.au> wrote= :


Begin forwarded message:

Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2014 08:45:21 +0800
From: IAN DELANEY <idella4@gentoo.org>
To: gen= too-python@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: reviewboard and its bugs

cancel the gentoo-python@lists, was intended for gentoo-dev@lists

The package reviewboard has reached a stage of warranting this
submission to the ML.=C2=A0 A simple search of reviewboard in bugzilla list= s
a few 'user submitted' bugs and no less than 3 sec bugs. This packa= ge I
added initially because interest was expressed mainly by my final
mentor and the other (prior) co-maintainer. Because of changes to
reviewboard upstream, we need a new eclass and category to cater to
certain js packages.

Now wishing to re-write all I have already written in the bugs, in
summary, reviewboard has become unworkable by the developers of
reviewboard itself going down the path of nodejs. Enter npm.
npm was an unknown to me until Djblets and django-pipeline ebuilds
failed due to the absence of UglifyJS and some related js deps.=C2=A0 On being informed of ebuilds for this and related deps in the overlay of
neurogeek, I discovered they required npm which it seems comes in
nodejs.=C2=A0 The response drawn by fellow devs over npm is in my limited experience unprecedented.=C2=A0 The overall reaction was leave it and don&#= 39;t
go there.=C2=A0 What became apparent from the ebulds in neurogeek's ove= rlay
was that these deps didn't lend themselves well to writing ebuilds for<= br> them for portage.=C2=A0 In the overlay there is in fact an npm eclass to overseer their installation into the system.

After some somewhat reluctant discussion of npm in irc, it has at least
been suggested that the use of nodejs' UglifyJS in django-pipeline
could be patched out to relieve us all of any reliance or involvement
of npm to install these js oriented deps.=C2=A0 That has not ofcourse been<= br> attempted or tested and allows for the probability of breaking Djblets
and or reviewboard which I suspect has been written by reviewboard
developers to explicitly depend on and call these deps. The decision it
seems isn't whether to allows npm into portage, it already comes with nodejs correct me if I misunderstand.=C2=A0 The question is whether to
support this npm installing packages into a gentoo system by ebuilds
essentially outside of portage.=C2=A0 This requires an eclass and it has been suggested a whole new category for portage under which to
categorise these npm type packages.=C2=A0 Such an eclass has already been written, however, that it has never been added to portage along with js
style packages in the overlay, to me at least, strongly suggests the
author always had reservations with its addition.

There is ofcourse the alternative; to write ebuilds to install these
packages without npm involvement.=C2=A0 This would still require an
eclass anyway.=C2=A0 =C2=A0Either way, nodejs and java script are totally o= utside
the realm of pythonic packages and are therefore outside my realm
of knowledge and experience.=C2=A0 Reviewboard developers have essentially<= br> created a huge dilemma for users of reviewboard in gentoo by going
electing to use this js 'toolchain'.=C2=A0 While I normally go to a= ny
lengths to maintain any and all packages within the python realm, this
reviewboard has gone way beyond that realm. Until this, its
underbelly was pure python and posed no real problem. Now I have a
growing and unwelcome list of bugs of this package assigned to me as
the sole remaining maintainer which are now unworkable.

The real problem here is that there is an apparent keen set of would
be users of this package, one of whom is a gentoo dev, who is to be
found in at least one of those bugs.=C2=A0 To delete or mask the package amounts to a clean solution, and also abandons gentoo users looking
to have the package made work for them.

In summary, because of changes to reviewboard upstream, we need a new
eclass and category to write ebuilds to these packages and add them to
portage.



--
kind regards

Ian Delaney


--
kind regards

Ian Delaney




--



--
Jesus Rivero= (Neurogeek)
Gentoo Developer
--f46d043892b17edaa1050110fad9--