[gentoo-project] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[gentoo-project] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Fabian Groffen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 400 bytes --]

All,

In less than two weeks, the council will meet again.  This is the time
to raise and prepare items that the council should put on the agenda to
vote on.

Please respond to this email with agenda items.  Please do not hestitate
to repeat your agenda item here with a pointer if you previously
suggested one (since the last meeting).


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

[gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 443 bytes --]

On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:30:25 +0200
Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:

> In less than two weeks, the council will meet again.  This is the time
> to raise and prepare items that the council should put on the agenda
> to vote on.

As an extension of ChangeLog topic, I'd like to suggest to require
developers to commit packages with matching (same) ChangeLog entries
and commit messages.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

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

[gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Fabian Groffen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 574 bytes --]

On 26-10-2011 18:35:51 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:30:25 +0200
> Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > In less than two weeks, the council will meet again.  This is the time
> > to raise and prepare items that the council should put on the agenda
> > to vote on.
> 
> As an extension of ChangeLog topic, I'd like to suggest to require
> developers to commit packages with matching (same) ChangeLog entries
> and commit messages.

Ok, what's your rationale behind that?


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 983 bytes --]

On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:37:24 +0200
Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 26-10-2011 18:35:51 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:30:25 +0200
> > Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > In less than two weeks, the council will meet again.  This is the
> > > time to raise and prepare items that the council should put on
> > > the agenda to vote on.
> > 
> > As an extension of ChangeLog topic, I'd like to suggest to require
> > developers to commit packages with matching (same) ChangeLog entries
> > and commit messages.
> 
> Ok, what's your rationale behind that?

1) easier migration to autogenerated ChangeLogs if we want that at
some point,

2) better availability of the information (right now, looking up
changes sometimes involves checking both CVS log and ChangeLog message
to see what actually happened),

3) one step towards preventing useless ChangeLog entries.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

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

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Fabian Groffen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 816 bytes --]

On 26-10-2011 18:49:27 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> > Ok, what's your rationale behind that?
> 
> 1) easier migration to autogenerated ChangeLogs if we want that at
> some point,

Since the Council has discussed that for several meetings to reach a
discussion, I don't think they are shortly going to change their minds.

> 2) better availability of the information (right now, looking up
> changes sometimes involves checking both CVS log and ChangeLog message
> to see what actually happened),

Could be considered as a bad commit message.

> 3) one step towards preventing useless ChangeLog entries.

Also this has been discussed and decided upon by the current and
previous Councils, so also that opinion is unlikely to suddenly change.


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 426 bytes --]

On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:06:07 +0200
Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:

> > 3) one step towards preventing useless ChangeLog entries.
> 
> Also this has been discussed and decided upon by the current and
> previous Councils, so also that opinion is unlikely to suddenly
> change.

I meant the useless ChangeLog messages done by developers on purpose
like 'ignore this'.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

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

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Fabian Groffen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 705 bytes --]

On 26-10-2011 19:11:24 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:06:07 +0200
> Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > > 3) one step towards preventing useless ChangeLog entries.
> > 
> > Also this has been discussed and decided upon by the current and
> > previous Councils, so also that opinion is unlikely to suddenly
> > change.
> 
> I meant the useless ChangeLog messages done by developers on purpose
> like 'ignore this'.

Oh, you can just edit them, and "fix" the ChangeLog.

I hope people will keep on looking for those, and contact the developer
in question to ask him/her to change his/her behaviour.


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Matt Turner]

On Wed, Oct 26, 2011 at 2:05 PM, Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> wrote:
> El mié, 26-10-2011 a las 19:15 +0200, Fabian Groffen escribió:
>> On 26-10-2011 19:11:24 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
>> > On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 19:06:07 +0200
>> > Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > > > 3) one step towards preventing useless ChangeLog entries.
>> > >
>> > > Also this has been discussed and decided upon by the current and
>> > > previous Councils, so also that opinion is unlikely to suddenly
>> > > change.
>> >
>> > I meant the useless ChangeLog messages done by developers on purpose
>> > like 'ignore this'.
>>
>> Oh, you can just edit them, and "fix" the ChangeLog.
>>
>> I hope people will keep on looking for those, and contact the developer
>> in question to ask him/her to change his/her behaviour.
>>
>>
>
> Why don't we try to reach a consensus? Maybe we should be allowed to
> simply run echangelog (or whatever is used) to generate a message like:
>  26 Oct 2011; Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> -pangomm-2.26.3.ebuild
>
> And simply that
>
> Pros:
> - People refusing to add a message saying "Drop old" (or similar) could
> be happy with this, as no redundant information is required to be
> written in ChangeLog.
> - Users will still see that a package was removed, as it's indicated
> with "-" previous removed file.
>
> What do you think?
>
> From my point of view, if we don't try to reach a consensus, we will
> expend time on things to enforce a policy that we could probably expend
> on other tasks and, then, maybe all of us should try to stop being so
> strict and try to give in a bit (not sure if it's the way in English to
> say "ceder" :S)

I think that makes a lot of sense.

Matt

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Fabian Groffen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 952 bytes --]

On 26-10-2011 20:05:05 +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> Why don't we try to reach a consensus? Maybe we should be allowed to
> simply run echangelog (or whatever is used) to generate a message like:
>   26 Oct 2011; Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org> -pangomm-2.26.3.ebuild
> 
> And simply that
> 
> Pros:
> - People refusing to add a message saying "Drop old" (or similar) could
> be happy with this, as no redundant information is required to be
> written in ChangeLog. 
> - Users will still see that a package was removed, as it's indicated
> with "-" previous removed file.
> 
> What do you think?

You can see it has been removed, but you typically want to know why.
That's the idea of the ChangeLog file.

Compare:

old

remove for security bug ...

[this is a placeholder, please ignore]

^

Version bump

Remove superseeded versions

Drop due to dep on <libpng-1.5


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn]

Fabian Groffen schrieb:
> You can see it has been removed, but you typically want to know why.
> That's the idea of the ChangeLog file.

One of the arguments for logging everything in ChangeLog was that
extracting this kind information from CVS can be cumbersome. So, I would
not agree with "typically".


Best regards,
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Fabian Groffen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 542 bytes --]

On 26-10-2011 23:03:39 +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> Fabian Groffen schrieb:
> > You can see it has been removed, but you typically want to know why.
> > That's the idea of the ChangeLog file.
> 
> One of the arguments for logging everything in ChangeLog was that
> extracting this kind information from CVS can be cumbersome. So, I would
> not agree with "typically".

I do not see your point.  Does my sentence change for you if you remove
the "typically"?


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn]

Fabian Groffen schrieb:
> On 26-10-2011 23:03:39 +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
>> Fabian Groffen schrieb:
>>> You can see it has been removed, but you typically want to know why.
>>> That's the idea of the ChangeLog file.
>>
>> One of the arguments for logging everything in ChangeLog was that
>> extracting this kind information from CVS can be cumbersome. So, I would
>> not agree with "typically".
> 
> I do not see your point.  Does my sentence change for you if you remove
> the "typically"?

If the reason why you want ChangeLogs is avoiding having to get the
information about commit activity from CVS, then the proposal to make
exaclty that the minimal ChangeLog entry seems reasonable.

If in addition you always want to know about the motivation for the
commit, then it won't be sufficient I guess. But based on the previous
discussion on mandatory ChangeLogs I have not gotten the impression that
this was typically called for.


Best regards,
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Fabian Groffen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1182 bytes --]

On 27-10-2011 00:13:41 +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> Fabian Groffen schrieb:
> > On 26-10-2011 23:03:39 +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> >> Fabian Groffen schrieb:
> >>> You can see it has been removed, but you typically want to know why.
> >>> That's the idea of the ChangeLog file.
> >>
> >> One of the arguments for logging everything in ChangeLog was that
> >> extracting this kind information from CVS can be cumbersome. So, I would
> >> not agree with "typically".
> > 
> > I do not see your point.  Does my sentence change for you if you remove
> > the "typically"?
> 
> If the reason why you want ChangeLogs is avoiding having to get the
> information about commit activity from CVS, then the proposal to make
> exaclty that the minimal ChangeLog entry seems reasonable.
> 
> If in addition you always want to know about the motivation for the
> commit, then it won't be sufficient I guess. But based on the previous
> discussion on mandatory ChangeLogs I have not gotten the impression that
> this was typically called for.

I still don't see your point, sorry.


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 195 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Markos Chandras]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 10/26/2011 05:35 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:30:25 +0200 Fabian Groffen
> <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>> In less than two weeks, the council will meet again.  This is the
>> time to raise and prepare items that the council should put on
>> the agenda to vote on.
> 
> As an extension of ChangeLog topic, I'd like to suggest to require 
> developers to commit packages with matching (same) ChangeLog
> entries and commit messages.
> 
I don't understand that

- -- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux)
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=5Tlq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Peter Volkov]

В Срд, 26/10/2011 в 18:35 +0200, Michał Górny пишет:
> On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:30:25 +0200
> Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:

> > In less than two weeks, the council will meet again.  This is the time
> > to raise and prepare items that the council should put on the agenda
> > to vote on.
> 
> As an extension of ChangeLog topic, I'd like to suggest to require
> developers to commit packages with matching (same) ChangeLog entries
> and commit messages.

I don't see how this logic may work in case you need to modify
Changelog, so ... wontfix :)

--
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Michał Górny]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 795 bytes --]

On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 10:43:49 +0400
Peter Volkov <pva@gentoo.org> wrote:

> В Срд, 26/10/2011 в 18:35 +0200, Michał Górny пишет:
> > On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:30:25 +0200
> > Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > > In less than two weeks, the council will meet again.  This is the
> > > time to raise and prepare items that the council should put on
> > > the agenda to vote on.
> > 
> > As an extension of ChangeLog topic, I'd like to suggest to require
> > developers to commit packages with matching (same) ChangeLog entries
> > and commit messages.
> 
> I don't see how this logic may work in case you need to modify
> Changelog, so ... wontfix :)

'Need' is a very bad word here. I'd rather use 'have a wannabe'.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny

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

Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-dev] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Peter Volkov]

В Пнд, 31/10/2011 в 09:14 +0100, Michał Górny пишет:
> On Mon, 31 Oct 2011 10:43:49 +0400
> Peter Volkov <pva@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > В Срд, 26/10/2011 в 18:35 +0200, Michał Górny пишет:
> > > On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:30:25 +0200
> > > Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > 
> > > > In less than two weeks, the council will meet again.  This is the
> > > > time to raise and prepare items that the council should put on
> > > > the agenda to vote on.
> > > 
> > > As an extension of ChangeLog topic, I'd like to suggest to require
> > > developers to commit packages with matching (same) ChangeLog entries
> > > and commit messages.
> > 
> > I don't see how this logic may work in case you need to modify
> > Changelog, so ... wontfix :)
> 
> 'Need' is a very bad word here. I'd rather use 'have a wannabe'.

We have and use this feature now so... better word should be "must"
until somebody provides very valid reasons to drop it. Speaking about
your reasons:

> 1) easier migration to autogenerated ChangeLogs if we want that at
> some point,

Still questionable need.

> 2) better availability of the information (right now, looking up
> changes sometimes involves checking both CVS log and ChangeLog message
> to see what actually happened),

Was discussed many times with the resolution: they should be different.

> 3) one step towards preventing useless ChangeLog entries.

In the spirit of Gentoo to fix this issue we just need to improve our
tools and the first step, moving echangelog into repoman, is already
done:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=337853


With best regards,
--
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Petteri Räty]

On 26.10.2011 19.30, Fabian Groffen wrote:

> 
> Please respond to this email with agenda items.  Please do not hestitate
> to repeat your agenda item here with a pointer if you previously
> suggested one (since the last meeting).
> 
> 

Let's vote on if you are allowed to remove functions from eclasses (or
break the API in general):

http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_f797a983b0d11677a1f781e48ab4e97d.xml

Last time this came up a decision wasn't reached:
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20100726-summary.txt

The decision should then be documented here:
http://devmanual.gentoo.org/eclass-writing/index.html

Regards,
Petteri

Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Ulrich Mueller]

>>>>> On Mon, 31 Oct 2011, Petteri Räty wrote:

> Let's vote on if you are allowed to remove functions from eclasses (or
> break the API in general):

> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_f797a983b0d11677a1f781e48ab4e97d.xml

> Last time this came up a decision wasn't reached:
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20100726-summary.txt

> The decision should then be documented here:
> http://devmanual.gentoo.org/eclass-writing/index.html

Why do we need a decision here? Isn't it simply a special case of the
"adding and updating eclasses" policy?

Ulrich

Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 2011-11-08

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 986 bytes --]

On 31.10.2011 12:27, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 31 Oct 2011, Petteri Räty wrote:
> 
>> Let's vote on if you are allowed to remove functions from eclasses (or
>> break the API in general):
> 
>> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_f797a983b0d11677a1f781e48ab4e97d.xml
> 
>> Last time this came up a decision wasn't reached:
>> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20100726-summary.txt
> 
>> The decision should then be documented here:
>> http://devmanual.gentoo.org/eclass-writing/index.html
> 
> Why do we need a decision here? Isn't it simply a special case of the
> "adding and updating eclasses" policy?
> 

Because when I joined I was taught to never the API of an eclass. Now
looking at gentoo-dev people want to be doing something else. From the
log provided you can see that the council has explicitly ruled nothing
on the issue yet. I think it would be better if we had something clear
in devmanual.

Regards,
Petteri


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 900 bytes --]