[gentoo-dev] Permission to add a dummy package in tree

[gentoo-dev] Permission to add a dummy package in tree

[Theo Chatzimichos]

Hello,

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

Theo

Re: [gentoo-dev] Permission to add a dummy package in tree

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1330 bytes --]

On Wed, 12 Dec 2012 19:07:09 +0100
Theo Chatzimichos <tampakrap@gentoo.org> 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,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 316 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Permission to add a dummy package in tree

[Theo Chatzimichos]

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Dec 2012 19:07:09 +0100
> Theo Chatzimichos <tampakrap@gentoo.org> 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,
> Michał Górny


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

Re: [gentoo-dev] Permission to add a dummy package in tree

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1976 bytes --]

On Wed, 12 Dec 2012 19:17:32 +0100
Theo Chatzimichos <tampakrap@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > On Wed, 12 Dec 2012 19:07:09 +0100
> > Theo Chatzimichos <tampakrap@gentoo.org> 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,
> > Michał Górny
> 
> 
> 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

Well, my main goal here is to clearly keep the package split
from 'meaningful' packages. So if I listed app-misc/ for no good
reason, I shall not see this package.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 316 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Permission to add a dummy package in tree

[Diego Elio Pettenò]

On 12/12/2012 19:07, Theo Chatzimichos wrote:
> It would be preferred to move that package in tree though.

I don't like it. Please use an overlay to test this kind of stuff, thanks.

-- 
Diego Elio Pettenò — Flameeyes
flameeyes@flameeyes.eu — http://blog.flameeyes.eu/

Re: [gentoo-dev] Permission to add a dummy package in tree

[Rich Freeman]

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Theo Chatzimichos <tampakrap@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 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

I'd prefer to not see a bunch of these, but having a single dummy
package in portage doesn't really seem like a bad thing.

Diego suggested using an overlay instead.  If you don't want to deal
with overlay logic another option might be to just make a replica of
the whole tree and host that somewhere else and just point to it for
syncing.  Then you can do anything you want to anything in the "tree."

Rich

Re: [gentoo-dev] Permission to add a dummy package in tree

[Theo Chatzimichos]

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 7:38 PM, Diego Elio Pettenò
<flameeyes@flameeyes.eu> wrote:
> On 12/12/2012 19:07, Theo Chatzimichos wrote:
>> It would be preferred to move that package in tree though.
>
> I don't like it. Please use an overlay to test this kind of stuff, thanks.

Thank you all for the feedback, I won't proceed.

Theo