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 B7F74138010 for ; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 00:02:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 43FC621C025 for ; Fri, 28 Sep 2012 00:02:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pb0-f53.google.com (mail-pb0-f53.google.com [209.85.160.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A052E0504 for ; Thu, 27 Sep 2012 22:13:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: by pbcwz12 with SMTP id wz12so4679493pbc.40 for ; Thu, 27 Sep 2012 15:13:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=KTdsWERc4FokMNwnQTZ6PjNtNWBDcKqyApaZWe2JVpQ=; b=sodgnXtqxOqYpEByZpvX4Qix3eceP0RHfdhZVlfaAyGafrfT8f49j7CoKa1xqK0TSZ Ctqh2vavSsCf6WzNpr3Q45lEj9HGSkCGbRjCjrXDpgYE0fkBWDAHD8rUOuLLkCUzAJ3n H2WMf5aVsOM7+rGwUDKDfKPpnbUmk/2Df1u/XkWIT+AjATKZXaC5azQBBzrIxPROLkCQ jZgRpkl9KuynZim1K2SRt+SlzGAB0Qo6HcfSy1qAwngiT9n4NAx5nWaq5tumEsHeGCaO EgMqgH22QqR3+W0iIegsnTgkgUWC50EEXRLIlCUyT4+9+VA43KHVJIezn1dYsqSQefKz 8BWQ== Received: by 10.68.229.138 with SMTP id sq10mr15292732pbc.126.1348784019730; Thu, 27 Sep 2012 15:13:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.gmail.com:587 (74-95-192-101-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [74.95.192.101]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id bm8sm4355166pab.3.2012.09.27.15.13.37 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 27 Sep 2012 15:13:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by smtp.gmail.com:587 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 27 Sep 2012 15:13:36 -0700 Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 15:13:36 -0700 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items -- Council meeting 09-10-2012 Message-ID: <20120927221336.GB9751@localhost> References: <20120925092414.GL37574@gentoo.org> <20577.32914.7474.976710@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20579.61409.451891.521881@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20579.61409.451891.521881@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: db2a2f87-a3d6-4d0f-9bef-906dd90ee80f X-Archives-Hash: 37ce72434597cd55a8bcb614b074834a On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 08:19:13AM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > >>>>> On Tue, 25 Sep 2012, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > - Package names: > > Our current spec forbids that package names "end in a hyphen > > followed by one or more digits". This isn't consequent, since it > > still allows PN to be e.g. "foo-1a" which looks like a valid PF. > > OTOH, there's no technical reason for this limitation (backwards > > compatibility issues taken aside). > > Since this issue is open since more than five years, I believe that > > it's time to ask the council for guidance in what direction we > > should go: > > a) Drop the limitation entirely (possibly in a future EAPI). > > b) Make it stricter, i.e. disallow package names ending in a > > hyphen followed by anything that looks like a valid PVR. > > This is current Portage behaviour, and the tree complies with > > it, too. > > c) Leave the spec as it is (and make Portage comply with it). > > See bug 174536 for details. > > Actually, there's also: > d) Require a) for Package managers and b) by tree policy > (Postel's Law, brought up by mgorny). Practically, this would > mean that repoman would reject "foo-1" as package name, but the > rest of Portage would accept it. Grr. And people wonder why I get brutally blunt at times. This restriction, whether people like it or not, is encoded into some fairly core places that have consequences. You do this, you break all existing managers that see it in the vdb. Not "oh looky, a warning, isn't that cute by mildly annoying", break. Badly. Break. PM shats the bed, traceback gets thrown. Considering managers do full graphs, that node gets touched, the affected PM isn't going to be able to even upgrade it's way out of it- best case, if it's implemented sanely a --nodeps will avoid that node. However a lot of PMs still have legacy virtuals code, meaning if that cache is stale, looky looky, the vdb gets walked and you get a 'boom'. This isn't even commenting on binpkgs, which is where you're likely to see older managers existing as clients. All of that is unversioned. We cannot hide this sort of change- at best we can deploy it, force all QA tools to block it for N years, than allow it in; anything else is risking known (yes known, people have been pointing this out for ages). What for? So someone can name their package foo-1? Is that really such a major gap we're willing to induce breakage? Will anyone even !@#*ing use a package names foo-1? I've yet to see an example given, just ignoring of the breakage it will induce. Honestly, you want to push it, you address how this isn't going to break things, lay out the timelines, identifying when we willingly switchover to breaking managers older than a certain date. It does not get pushed up to the council w/out the negatives/flaws mentioned. Shorter version; you very clearly left out option C; "leave it as is since PMS is filled with warts, this isn't hurting anything, and changing it will break things." ~harring