[gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance

[gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance

[Dirkjan Ochtman]

Hi there,

I just completed removing the python herd from the metadata of about
70 packages in the net-zope category (all of these packages are still
nominally maintained by the net-zope herd). This happened due to the
fact that the majority of the python team isn't interested in
maintaining Zope-related packages (there's 200+ of them in the
net-zope category), and a different herd already exists that should in
theory be able to take care of them.

The net-zope herd nominally has two members: radek and tupone. From
grepping changelogs, radek hasn't committed anything in net-zope since
2007. tupone committed one change in net-zope in 2010 and 4 in 2009.
Instead, most of the recent work has been done by arfrever, who has
recently been retired.

Given this situation, I'm not sure it makes sense for us to keep all
of those packages in the tree. Except for dependencies on
zope-interface, which is pretty accepted and will keep being
maintained by the python team in addition to the net-zope team, not
much is depending on net-zope packages, either:

app-admin/zprod-manager depends on net-zope/zope (hasn't been
committed to since 2008)

dev-python/rdflib has an optional dependency on net-zope/zodb, in
addition to many other storage backends

media-libs/FusionSound for whatever reason blocks net-zope/zodb

(There are two packages in dev-python that depend on zope-testing, but
those are actually only dependencies of net-zope packages again.)

Zope maintenance is a lot of work and delays other stuff indefinitely:

https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=148333 (blockers for Python 2.5)
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=335248 (new Plone requires
80-100 new ebuilds)

And there are 3 open security bugs from 2011 with vulnerabilities in
Zope and/or Plone.

So unless someone steps up to takes a serious whack at all of this
stuff, perhaps we should just cut it from the portage tree.

Cheers,

Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance

[Robin H. Johnson]

On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 12:37:00PM +0200, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> And there are 3 open security bugs from 2011 with vulnerabilities in
> Zope and/or Plone.
> 
> So unless someone steps up to takes a serious whack at all of this
> stuff, perhaps we should just cut it from the portage tree.
Ugh :-(.

Many years (5+) ago I was part of the Zope folk for a while.
I think some of my old Zope deploys from then are still happily running
with their new owners.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee & Infrastructure Lead
E-Mail     : robbat2@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance

[Fabio Erculiani]

On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Hi there,
>
>
> media-libs/FusionSound for whatever reason blocks net-zope/zodb
>

probably file collisions. IIRC i've been hit by that long time ago.
There should be also a bug about it.

>
> Cheers,
>
> Dirkjan
>
>



-- 
Fabio Erculiani

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance

[Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 358 bytes --]

2011-08-13 12:37:00 Dirkjan Ochtman napisał(a):
> we should just cut it from the portage tree.

I suggest to wait until Zope team decides which overlay will be used to host updated, improved
and actively maintained ebuilds. The comment in package.mask should describe transition from
gentoo-x86 to overlay.

-- 
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 836 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 648 bytes --]

On Sun, 14 Aug 2011 00:50:40 +0200
Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <arfrever.fta@gmail.com> wrote:

> 2011-08-13 12:37:00 Dirkjan Ochtman napisał(a):
> > we should just cut it from the portage tree.
> 
> I suggest to wait until Zope team decides which overlay will be used
> to host updated, improved and actively maintained ebuilds. The
> comment in package.mask should describe transition from gentoo-x86 to
> overlay.

Considering tupone's decision and radek's retirement, there's no Zope
team anymore. I'll just mask it for removal in a reasonable amount
of time and let it die in fire.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance

[Dirkjan Ochtman]

On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 00:50, Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
<arfrever.fta@gmail.com> wrote:
> I suggest to wait until Zope team decides which overlay will be used to host updated, improved
> and actively maintained ebuilds. The comment in package.mask should describe transition from
> gentoo-x86 to overlay.

Which Zope team is that? Would that be you? Having an overlay with
updated packages certainly sounds good, but it would be nice to have
some indication of what we're waiting for, or how long we're waiting.

Cheers,

Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance

[Dirkjan Ochtman]

On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 09:23, Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Which Zope team is that? Would that be you? Having an overlay with
> updated packages certainly sounds good, but it would be nice to have
> some indication of what we're waiting for, or how long we're waiting.

Arfrever, it would be nice if you could answer these questions.

If there's no answer, we should just go ahead and last-rite the entire category.

BTW, what are the mechanics WRT removing an entire category? Should we
keep the category around for the benefit of overlays, or are there
mechanisms in place so that overlays can setup their own categories?

Cheers,

Dirkjan

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance

[Patrick Lauer]

On 08/29/11 13:33, Dirkjan Ochtman wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 09:23, Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Which Zope team is that? Would that be you? Having an overlay with
>> updated packages certainly sounds good, but it would be nice to have
>> some indication of what we're waiting for, or how long we're waiting.
> 
> Arfrever, it would be nice if you could answer these questions.
> 
> If there's no answer, we should just go ahead and last-rite the entire category.
> 
> BTW, what are the mechanics WRT removing an entire category? Should we
> keep the category around for the benefit of overlays, or are there
> mechanisms in place so that overlays can setup their own categories?

Overlays can easily define their own categories if needed, so pruning
the whole directory should not be a problem. Only profiles/categories
might need to be adapted.

Re: [gentoo-dev] net-zope maintenance

[Dirkjan Ochtman]

On Mon, Aug 29, 2011 at 13:33, Dirkjan Ochtman <djc@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Arfrever, it would be nice if you could answer these questions.
>
> If there's no answer, we should just go ahead and last-rite the entire category.

FYI, I discussed this with Arfrever. The python overlay will be
retired in favor of a new overlay where Arfrever (and anyone wanting
to help out!) can continue to work on both all of the net-zope stuff
and probably some python stuff that he is interested in.

Cheers,

Dirkjan