From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-project+bounces-3538-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (unknown [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5FE81381FA
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri, 9 May 2014 15:29:41 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BE925E08C2;
Fri, 9 May 2014 15:29:40 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from baptiste.telenet-ops.be (baptiste.telenet-ops.be [195.130.132.51])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03DAEE08C0
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 9 May 2014 15:29:39 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from gentoo.org ([94.226.55.127])
by baptiste.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp
id zrVe1n01X2khLEN01rVeh4; Fri, 09 May 2014 17:29:39 +0200
Date: Fri, 9 May 2014 17:29:25 +0200
From: Tom Wijsman <TomWij@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Cc: hasufell@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call For Agenda Items - 13 May 2014
Message-ID: <20140509172925.29e3f212@gentoo.org>
In-Reply-To: <536CE132.1070305@gentoo.org>
References: <CAGfcS_n-u9T7xec7YGumsnkMXRRnHWQ2i+3SEha+69veSP--WQ@mail.gmail.com>
<CAGfcS_nc5DRqy5urW9WjqgD2EKvmc5Ls7Pee2h4Z73xpnx0Q9Q@mail.gmail.com>
<536CE132.1070305@gentoo.org>
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.23; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-project+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-project+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list <gentoo-project.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1;
boundary="Sig_/b4xHcfaAi1d4BAWTSjqdMGg"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
X-Archives-Salt: dc1a7e6a-9a59-432e-beff-bcab98516183
X-Archives-Hash: b22b51f31d89fc3170e0f063579e3502
--Sig_/b4xHcfaAi1d4BAWTSjqdMGg
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Fri, 09 May 2014 14:07:46 +0000
hasufell <hasufell@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I ask the council to vote on banning pkg-config files that would be
> added or renamed downstream (at least this will prevent new
> violations).
I ask them to consider to allow gentoo-*.pc files as an exception.
Totally having no pkg-config files is going to keep breakage around,
which is the reason as to why they are currently added.
Fixes to build systems aren't always that easy as could be claimed;
if they were, this wouldn't even be a problem in the first place.
> This was discussed a year ago or so on the ML [0] with agreement that
> we need at least a policy to forbid it.
There is no such agreement there to forbid it.
> A tracker [1] was opened and a devmanual policy [2] introduced.
Added by hasufell, without consensus; also, there is disagreement:
ssuominen: "there should be no such policy, [...]"
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D445130#c6
ssuominen: "I support the idea of shipping pkg-config files [...]"
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3D443786#c1
Most tracker bugs are not responded to; so, I don't even see how
banning would fix or prevent these bugs from existing.
> Recently, QA team has voted on their own pkg-config policy which seems
> to even diverge from the devmanual policy. [3]
It's somewhat similar, just with other wording; your wording contains
"unavoidable fix" which is exactly the case with some of these bugs
(eg. with upstreams like Lua and/or NVIDIA), we recommend upstreaming
and thus the maintainer can take similar exceptions as yours to that.
> Further, QA team is not helpful when dealing with these policy
> violations and seems to not care much, saying it's not even within
> their scope. [4]
It is not a policy violation; the only one who can act on the bug given
the situation is the maintainer, the only thing QA can say is to take
this to the gentoo-dev ML and/or in extension what you have done now.
In addition, we give some thoughts to consider; that's all we can do,
until there's more awareness and discussion from the community.
We look out for the best interest of *all* developers. (GLEP:48)
> Reasons and actual breakages why this causes cross-distro problems can
> be seen here:
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D694671
> https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D715796
> https://github.com/gusnan/devilspie2/commit/8bbc2f64bc2115178d5e1de170c1c=
1882eaf2799
We can work together with other distributions to use the same .pc
files; for a organized way, this can be done in a central repository.
This removes the need to endless wait on upstreams that won't accept
the .pc files; instead, it'll force them to accept it as multiple
distributions start to use a central repository for their .pc files.
> It seems some people even go further actually doing the same terrible
> debian hackery... RENAMING libraries to make their idea of slotting
> work [5].
> This can break programs that dlopen these libraries [6].
It will, until distributions work together to cooperate on .pc files.
> This should also be banned, IMO and exceptions have to be discussed on
> dev ML with the community, not just silently hacked up by the
> maintainer.
With what purpose? To verbally agree that we can't convince upstream?
> These things affect more than just gentoo (and definitely other
> developers as well).
And when something affects somebody, you should talk to them; in other
words, we need to talk to and work together with the other distributions
and share .pc files with them so we no longer have the current breakage
and/or extra time wasted to build system maintenance that breaks too.
But for a start; naming them gentoo-*.pc can at least make it clear to
developers that their program will only work on Gentoo, avoiding most
of the problems that would affect other distributions.
Consider to choose for consistency that scales and works in the future;
not for build system regressions, not for extra maintenance work. TIA
--=20
With kind regards,
Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer
E-mail address : TomWij@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
--Sig_/b4xHcfaAi1d4BAWTSjqdMGg
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTbPRZAAoJEPWZc8roOL/Qu20IAIvABIpEtAaBUU2SGmfe57Rb
esvdKl9mhBPV27dvTxImDEYQH/Z57K+XtwIWOGepO9MaQw4p+1bIyPzl2XPgXl5N
LzctjNiW6RgcVGwV4PDh5tzJET85RC5Wmc/XSoR+3bcVTWSnE39RmzHWWv8rirTn
c6kAQd1giSij5NGOC5p+6qDsb/p5NhRc8IRYbiUzLWnTdCs6oBYS/1bUSyKeMy+W
MyyeA8bCJXNsxj2ffkZRQZovUQ4zk7EtVVo7r7WM2HD+3HEtCVsAgSGkTgGn4JUd
aF6nuo7Fs5SPMGHaCT9ujpvvJDK2fGCXwvcJkaIcc5tFoA3fIgsBvMrtKRTpWf4=
=OMb1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--Sig_/b4xHcfaAi1d4BAWTSjqdMGg--