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 2519F1381F3 for ; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 18:37:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0B6A1E091A; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 18:37:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1FEA4E08ED for ; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 18:37:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qa0-f49.google.com (mail-qa0-f49.google.com [209.85.216.49]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mattst88) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 11DCC33DE0C for ; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 18:37:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qa0-f49.google.com with SMTP id bs12so257235qab.1 for ; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 11:37:27 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:content-type; bh=ekxWl9bqXfTPkXN+Fak+3vU4/9t1rwVN7IeDNBJ2GDs=; b=cYhuKtqYHNdCvhIKZqkEeAA0Hx71MOa3RxLPAoWV9+MUpTPLzgAWe9JjDfbAlARvHM elffukWi/c5j0tFW5wgzXKj+ZG/jiR+ADt/Iyu6Siz4KiB130cRlCOfnaxfeocheZOld yjbIdsVFgXucbG6RUbBxJBi+UhcNy3p/Kl0oWGOCQyIdXHtHbm5FWzBtKnRgr5okAuA4 ZdS7Aw+6ZvdbAcJB9/w2vBsihQyHc8v9/CKNN4FNSMJX8YbBq1LTVNTJmW0Wflh5B9jt aFu41OberlW0MJ8z3w0sFnF4J7FHWL3hDex1olMPx2wuxSoL0Sm2PtGSgg6aC1QMAUTU eB7g== X-Received: by 10.224.8.129 with SMTP id h1mr26933649qah.86.1366742247637; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 11:37:27 -0700 (PDT) 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 Received: by 10.49.28.41 with HTTP; Tue, 23 Apr 2013 11:37:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <20130419091632.D01152171D@flycatcher.gentoo.org> <20130419153043.30ffc50c@portable> <20130421170549.41cfea49@portable> <20130422154033.65a68a40@portable> <20130423200053.77ed8b49@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> From: Matt Turner Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2013 11:37:07 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [OT/NIT] Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in profiles: ChangeLog package.mask To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: bbe74942-73b9-484f-84be-3cf3599cb0d4 X-Archives-Hash: 5b652b1587cdeeda6ac8bba07dc3c7ad On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 11:20 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Tue, Apr 23, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Jeroen Roovers wrote: >> Er, you can't be seriously suggesting we will drop repoman checks with >> the migration to git? I don't see how that would benefit anyone. >> > > Interesting point. One thing to keep in mind with git is that commits > don't affect the "central repository." Pushes are what impacts the > repository. > > If I spend six months working on a bunch of coordinated package > changes, nobody will see a thing until I push those commits and 500 > ebuilds all change atomically (not that I'm suggesting that lack of > communication is to be encouraged). A repoman check on a commit may > not reflect its impact six months later when it actually hits the main > tree. ... if you're squashing 6 months of work into a single commit before pushing. I don't think we want to do that, do we? Maybe bisecting isn't particularly interesting for the portage tree.