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 785201381F3 for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 18:18:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A2CFFE0268; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 18:18:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-we0-f181.google.com (mail-we0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 08DD421C0C3 for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 18:17:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-we0-f181.google.com with SMTP id t11so438123wey.40 for ; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 10:17:32 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=FODcEdCjHfmIZ7QXEomm4t7P8AakzUgAs+gMgnEMM2w=; b=GF7zZ005JkAZ+clagZ6LhxsJ/9nTsYPw+3ZiuFQMnuVMY0GSVLp6/mKg0Drk/B1qBh 8AQybWDJXSdRNCLROZ5ZqFUtXK71zeNZUvKnvHGShDsGtMSwcrMJtChX0NgwJ/o5Ri/D oSr3haBbHH+2QIKX2j9hZU5lkyyxG1utAhpcz3rSLLB0UDssLr0hBzGKtzRXnEhfGlGI wNXlMAmZhNvC4Exlo38xVnImip6mu6twdVcGBFHIYVPSH0k77fL0oeZdVKOHTkt8ibUx G/bnePb1WxmPeP43fycNus5XjBhOkQ5QhyJzLJKJyYwhmjWXSDPgMYSmoMqbeN4ofDuH xoxQ== 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 10.180.102.101 with SMTP id fn5mr3443375wib.19.1355336252626; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 10:17:32 -0800 (PST) Sender: tampakrap@gmail.com Received: by 10.194.235.6 with HTTP; Wed, 12 Dec 2012 10:17:32 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20121212191454.0006f1d6@pomiocik.lan> References: <20121212191454.0006f1d6@pomiocik.lan> Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 19:17:32 +0100 X-Google-Sender-Auth: RjCVrF_T0133WQqApeSR1omI2Ag Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Permission to add a dummy package in tree From: Theo Chatzimichos To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: ab52544a-f3b8-495c-bb60-89a07f305a17 X-Archives-Hash: 44fa45e07fb3ddae3e1703e394db74a6 On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny = wrote: > On Wed, 12 Dec 2012 19:07:09 +0100 > Theo Chatzimichos wrote: > >> these days I am working on a puppet module for portage. For testing I >> have created a dummy package which can be found here [1]. The package >> installs files based on useflags, and it comes in stable, testing and >> hardmasked versions, plus it has some useflag changes between >> versions. With this package I can make sure that the puppet provider >> does its various operations fine. I'm about to start writing unit >> tests for that provider, and I would like to use that package for the >> testing. It would be preferred to move that package in tree though. >> Since the ebuilds are useless for everybody else, and maybe violate >> policy about the stable tree, I'd like to know if there are any >> objections to move it to tree. If there are none, I'll move it in one >> month >> >> [1] https://github.com/gentoo-el/overlay/tree/master/app-misc/dummy > > To be honest, I don't mind having dummy packages in the tree. I would > be happy to convert gentoopm sometime to use them instead of relying on > random packages to match its criteria. > > However, I'd rather see them in a special category, and preferably > prefixed with 'gentoo-' to make it least possible for any kind of name > collisions. > > -- > Best regards, > Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny If there are more dummy packages then a separate category seems good idea (and thanks for that), but if mine is the only case then i don't see a reason for that Theo