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 TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96AF1139085 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2017 15:01:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 98982E0D91; Fri, 6 Jan 2017 15:01:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-qk0-x232.google.com (mail-qk0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3D3DFE0D8D for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2017 15:01:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qk0-x232.google.com with SMTP id u25so461501592qki.2 for ; Fri, 06 Jan 2017 07:01:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to; bh=MyMnjO1wlD0u/cQIzLCx26i6AiMq2CqmtsdAMLlC4B8=; b=OR3+ispRvBdsvLCsrV9n6kuSz1LpNaKqWKJz09hhrJNbh5pGVCbZNMTlwWJYWDV1f8 6QrzcxBIUFOeIaEl8jDPtjzH24uPjzEBf/t4lXvDNmA7Ur/89RvPX5D9vm9XmkBktcct kP86FbgSm+XJEoy/G5GSlaJrVU6ZqRnlrEOcNfx6CYZX3trXH6wzdM7d/bzDrag70WWR BCb2SIkE8BFuUWSanmK6E/yZks8+lh3Z0jvcO54L9gpYhbjXIYFwhMA9VZA3V4gh2f/N 9gSmZ+9rq5GehE/XDR+JFn+PIPiuBQ2kXD3EmVsalJNeUCP8sjfwyFMvx7x5IprRibxh 4XBw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to; bh=MyMnjO1wlD0u/cQIzLCx26i6AiMq2CqmtsdAMLlC4B8=; b=P9XysLPzAfq+kq7YBlw98gLk1lmelvEyJLBLNJ+xVhQYtSseOxnMgrojB9iS22nbBr 2OP+d0vZVwdcD7mARA4f+Z0/Yjx4Lx705JSX0l109wy/DoeTecdu5KV63IwBzHyjg5uZ CFmC8XZ5RKWDtPwXLE0iL6Q3I7ROZGilxuiNaah30BR0FBgVdN2P6AucQI39CMw6xiAl O+op67Gz0oJesbbQqCKWsdnpz2DTsLPqU98cRAiwAZwB7aArZTVxczjyD2UGuvU1sbjS RlOQLmu3uE4Jk03xp5EIKUpjxNVyXJtcPLxRyDUpFEs3Sh2zoM25H13soFptVGTs7M/0 fLoA== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKNNzwUeC3Wn7MdS21tTmyWEkeOkACODBUI9l/Q9+tfgGhBfxbAApPg7f2ma05nOx3H1OlulE57OZx51Q== X-Received: by 10.55.25.153 with SMTP id 25mr80632582qkz.132.1483714894195; Fri, 06 Jan 2017 07:01:34 -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 MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.140.34.73 with HTTP; Fri, 6 Jan 2017 07:01:33 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20170106172724.027341d7@katipo2.lan> References: <4a185773-6144-69b8-a466-0e554732f12f@gentoo.org> <3374938.6WoLSc5MN8@mal> <589f3521-af7e-488d-8bba-4465c3a78e8e@gmail.com> <7959202.qokhvJWHAx@mal> <20170106172724.027341d7@katipo2.lan> From: Rich Freeman Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2017 10:01:33 -0500 X-Google-Sender-Auth: _9fJtrHqs-DpF_-2GW8LLNsx-mE Message-ID: Subject: Re: Why lastrite when it works? (Was: Re: [gentoo-dev] Packages up for grabs due to retirement) To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 9601448d-da98-4a89-9185-d4348dc792ae X-Archives-Hash: 14309fb8802c13985fa1fad4ae81e8ff On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 11:27 PM, Kent Fredric wrote: > > If packages had a field called "BUGS=" it could contain an array of > bugs a package is known to contain, but can be conditionally avoided if > you're careful. > > Packages with non-empty BUGS= fields would be treated as hard-masked > for the purpose of repoman checks, and so packages that depend on > specific version ranges of packages with BUGS= fields are invalid, > and need their own BUGS= fields. > So, while I'm not sure if this is the best way to go about it, I think what it does point to is there being possible benefit in creating a closer link between our repository and bug trackers. We've seen this come up in managing stable requests as well (having users be able to vote on things, having automated testing, etc). With the recent stable changes we have bugs being tagged with "atoms." With your proposal we have ebuilds being tagged with bugs. I can see benefits to having a single way to associate bugs and ebuilds, and making those associations available to bug trackers and package managers. I think the question is: 1. What is the best way to go about this? 2. Is anybody actually going to make use of this? The intended use cases in #2 probably will influence #1. However, it doesn't make sense to have multiple ways of doing these associations, because bugzilla doesn't know anything about the repo, and portage doesn't know anything about bugzilla. Having one place to store the associations and tools to make that information accessible elsewhere makes more sense. -- Rich