Re: [gentoo-project] council meeting agenda, mar 12

[Daniel Campbell <zlg@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2393 bytes --]

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 09:33:35AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 1:39 AM, Daniel Campbell <zlg@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > If there's already an easy way to find council decisions like this, pardon
> > my ignorance.
> 
> Council decisions are generally made in meetings, and posted in the
> summaries at:
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Council/Meeting_logs
> 
> For whatever reason this decision was pushed a bit and is in a bug:
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=611234
> 
> Speaking personally I didn't mind voting this way since it was mostly
> just a re-iteration of the previous decision, and it had been hashed
> out on the lists.
> 
> I believe it is on the agenda for today mainly to get it into the
> summary so that it isn't lost in bugzilla.  I don't really expect much
> further discussion.
> 
> The decision was:
> 
> The council confirms its earlier decision (2014-10-14 meeting) to drop
> CVS headers after migration to Git.
> 
> 1) Any $Id$ and $Header$ lines are to be removed from ebuilds and
> eclasses in the gentoo repository, as well as from other files, e.g.,
> metadata, profiles, and files (except patches) in FILESDIR.
> 
> 2) Removal should be done at once, and a repoman check should be
> implemented to prevent such lines from accidentally being inserted
> again.
> 
> 3) Infra is asked not to expand any $Id$ or other keywords, neither at
> rsync generation time, nor via git attributes in the development
> repository."
> 
> -- 
> Rich
> 

Thanks for taking the time to point readers in the right direction. I
did as mgorny told me last night. I found a single bug and a commented
out portion of code in the repoman branch of portage.git. It took some
digging to learn what you covered above.

The git migration happened quite a while ago, so it'll be nice to see
ebuilds with a little less boilerplate. What pushed the decision back so
far it was reconfirmed? Assuming the tooling already exists to replace
the functionality that was intended [1], it seems like we're due to get
this behind us. :)

To confirm: going forward, maintainers don't need to edit their old
ebuilds, but repoman will yell at you if any *new* files get added and
have $Id$. Do I have that right?

Thanks again for being constructive.


[1] I believe git can do that with some hook magic

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 833 bytes --]