From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jb8o7-0000pn-Rr for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:26:52 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 400E5E0193; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:26:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13B4AE0193 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:26:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9D78F65E00 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:26:49 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.076 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.076 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.523, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ry9ak0evhwoj for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:26:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.org (main.gmane.org [80.91.229.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8A2464A55 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:26:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1Jb8nn-0004sq-SK for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:26:31 +0000 Received: from ip68-231-12-179.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.12.179]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:26:31 +0000 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-12-179.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:26:31 +0000 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] net-libs/xulrunner-1.9 slotting or not? Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:26:23 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <47DBF558.7030705@gentoo.org> <47DCBE68.5000109@gentoo.org> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-12-179.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.132 (Waxed in Black) Sender: news Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 55a60616-9e03-409d-9835-824590b31e6d X-Archives-Hash: c3cde76a20f502629b0519f02bc4e786 Luca Barbato posted 47DCBE68.5000109@gentoo.org, excerpted below, on Sun, 16 Mar 2008 07:30:00 +0100: > Ra=C3=BAl Porcel wrote: >> Xulrunner-1.9 is a big change, and the apps using it won't work until >> they are fixed. So this needs to be decided, i've been working on >> slotting xulrunner, and i'm ready to put it in the tree. However i'd >> like to see what developers(since they will be the ones who will have >> to deal with this) and users prefer. Even if an app is compatible with >> xulrunner-1.9, it will have to be patched if we slot xulrunner. Since >> the pkgconfig files for xulrunner-1.9 are renamed to avoid collisions >> with current xulrunner-1.8. >> The other approach would be not slotting it, p.mask xulrunner-1.9 and >> wait until all the packages work against it and then unmask. >=20 > Given the number of applications I'd rather have them fixed with the > patches pushed to respective upstreams if we got there first. Thanks for the wisdom of asking about this, Raul. Given the way you=20 worded things, it looks like the consensus is heading a way other than=20 you might have expected. Unslotted xulrunner seems to be the consensus, so we aren't committing to= =20 "forever" maintain patches ourselves -- on a package-base that may well=20 expand over time. Some questions. What's the possibility of getting upstream to handle the= =20 renaming, thereby making slotting much easier while eliminating the=20 "eternal" patch commitment? Has the issue even been brought up with=20 mozilla-upstream? I know they aren't always the most receptive to=20 community suggestions, but it's worth asking, anyway. How many packages are we talking about? Regardless of how we go, fixing=20 ten is going to be far easier than a hundred, or five hundred. --=20 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman --=20 gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list