public inbox for gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: [gentoo-project] Re: Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2013-09-10
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2013 11:59:42 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <21020.30862.522397.827536@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <21020.30575.805569.383992@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2757 bytes --]

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

I'd like to ask the council to perform two votes about behaviour of
install functions and about default src_install(). This arises from
bug 481664, see the long discussion there [1].

In a nutshell: The default src_install() implementation in EAPIs 4
and 5 is flawed because it doesn't account for the DOCS variable being
defined but empty. It ends up calling dodoc without any arguments in
this case. This will work in Portage (with a QA warning), but the
stricter implementation in Paludis will error out.

1. I propose that we clarify PMS wording to say that the do*() install
   functions take one or filenames as arguments [2]. This would match
   established behaviour of all package managers.

2. There is consensus that default src_install should be fixed in the
   next EAPI. The question is if we should retroactively change the
   specification [3]. Effectively, that wouldn't change Portage
   behaviour much (only suppress a QA warning), because it doesn't
   make any difference if checking for empty DOCS takes place in dodoc
   or in the caller. OTOH, it turns out that no ebuild is directly
   affected by the flaw in the package manager function (only
   indirectly, because the PM's implementation was copied to some
   eclasses). So maybe this change is not so urgent.

To summarise the timeline of events so far:
- Long-time Portage behaviour is that do* functions error out when
  called with no arguments.
- PMS has documented this Portage behaviour, but wording isn't very
  clear for the issue at hand.
- Other package managers also follow the Portage implementation.
- EAPI 4 has introduced a default src_install function. The function
  doesn't account for empty DOCS.
- Subsequently, the EAPI 4 default was copied to src_install of a few
  eclasses (e.g., multilib-minimal.eclass).
- Portage was then changed to allow dodoc with no arguments [4].
  Other do* functions keep their strict behaviour, though.
- Some ebuilds started setting empty DOCS. This succeeds with Portage,
  but fails with other package managers. Bug 480892 was filed.
- Recently, a QA warning was added to dodoc in Portage [5], so that
  ebuilds using empty DOCS can be spotted and fixed.

Ulrich

[1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=481664
[2] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.pms/764
[3] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.pms/765
[4] http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=6271cfe43dcf0cb42d4c2c0b772a7be17be78d2f
[5] http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=83ac345bb227dc1752a895d53037fce36c9c7966

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2013-08-27  9:59 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 66+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-08-27  9:54 [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2013-09-10 Ulrich Mueller
2013-08-27  9:59 ` Ulrich Mueller [this message]
2013-08-27 14:15   ` [gentoo-project] " Ian Stakenvicius
2013-08-27 14:27   ` Michał Górny
2013-08-28 11:15 ` [gentoo-project] " Markos Chandras
2013-08-28 11:24   ` Rich Freeman
2013-08-28 17:28     ` Matt Turner
2013-08-28 17:39       ` Ian Stakenvicius
2013-08-28 12:52   ` Samuli Suominen
2013-08-28 17:35   ` Andreas K. Huettel
2013-08-29  6:09   ` Michael Weber
2013-08-29  8:32     ` Markos Chandras
2013-08-29 11:22       ` Michael Weber
2013-08-29 13:16     ` Ben de Groot
2013-08-29 13:33       ` Markos Chandras
2013-08-29 15:34       ` Jack Morgan
2013-08-29 15:57         ` Andreas K. Huettel
2013-08-30  8:52           ` Sergey Popov
2013-08-30 12:53             ` Chris Reffett
2013-09-18 12:32               ` [gentoo-project] " Steven J. Long
2013-08-29 16:06         ` [gentoo-project] " Rich Freeman
2013-08-29 15:56       ` Andreas K. Huettel
2013-08-29 16:15       ` Matt Turner
2013-08-29 16:25         ` Matt Turner
2013-08-29 20:03       ` William Hubbs
2013-08-29 15:22   ` Jack Morgan
2013-08-29 15:44     ` Rich Freeman
2013-08-29 16:06       ` Andreas K. Huettel
2013-08-29 17:49         ` Rich Freeman
2013-09-15 11:41           ` Rich Freeman
2013-09-17 13:04             ` [gentoo-project] Minor arches (was: Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2013-09-10) Ulrich Mueller
2013-09-17 17:40               ` Matt Turner
2013-09-17 18:56               ` Agostino Sarubbo
2013-08-29 17:17     ` [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2013-09-10 Pacho Ramos
2013-08-29 18:33       ` Tom Wijsman
2013-08-29 19:40         ` Tom Wijsman
2013-08-29 20:23         ` Andreas K. Huettel
2013-09-15 15:03       ` Rich Freeman
2013-09-15 15:21         ` Michał Górny
2013-09-15 15:22         ` Pacho Ramos
2013-09-15 19:03           ` Rich Freeman
2013-09-18  2:53             ` Daniel Campbell
2013-09-18  6:51               ` Pacho Ramos
2013-09-18  7:19               ` Sergey Popov
2013-09-18  8:02               ` Daunting developer process? (was Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting) 2013-09-10 Sven Vermeulen
2013-09-18  8:40                 ` Markos Chandras
2013-09-18 12:18                 ` [gentoo-project] Re: Daunting developer process? (was " Steven J. Long
2013-09-18 13:55                   ` Tom Wijsman
2013-09-18 10:42               ` [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2013-09-10 heroxbd
2013-09-19  4:33                 ` Daniel Campbell
2013-09-19  6:07                   ` Pacho Ramos
2013-09-19 13:21                     ` Daniel Campbell
2013-09-19 19:35                       ` Pacho Ramos
2013-09-19 10:09                   ` Dirkjan Ochtman
2013-09-19 12:37                   ` Tom Wijsman
2013-09-19 13:33                     ` Daniel Campbell
2013-09-15 19:08         ` Ciaran McCreesh
2013-09-15 20:18           ` Rich Freeman
2013-08-28 12:46 ` hasufell
2013-08-28 13:18   ` Ulrich Mueller
2013-08-28 14:04     ` hasufell
2013-08-28 17:02       ` Ulrich Mueller
2013-08-29  2:09         ` Patrick Lauer
2013-08-29 11:21           ` Rich Freeman
2013-08-29 13:37             ` hasufell
2013-09-03  9:20 ` [gentoo-project] " Ulrich Mueller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=21020.30862.522397.827536@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de \
    --to=ulm@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox