From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (unknown [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3A471381FA for ; Fri, 9 May 2014 14:07:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E2FE8E0898; Fri, 9 May 2014 14:07:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3F0F1E0888 for ; Fri, 9 May 2014 14:07:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from 127.0.0.1 (unknown [171.25.193.131]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hasufell) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3F3EA33FC8D for ; Fri, 9 May 2014 14:07:55 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <536CE132.1070305@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 09 May 2014 14:07:46 +0000 From: hasufell 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 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Call For Agenda Items - 13 May 2014 References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 688b2559-d226-4964-99f9-25753256ba52 X-Archives-Hash: 2721abf62e39db0edd93f65913887231 Rich Freeman: > On Sun, Apr 27, 2014 at 8:18 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: >> The next Gentoo Council meeting will be on 13 May 2014, at 19:00 UTC. >> >> Please reply to this email with any proposed agenda items. > > There have not been any proposed agenda items. Here is next week's > agenda (if you have any additions, please chime in): > > http://dev.gentoo.org/~rich0/council/council_agenda_20140513.txt > > Rich > 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). This was discussed a year ago or so on the ML [0] with agreement that we need at least a policy to forbid it. A tracker [1] was opened and a devmanual policy [2] introduced. Recently, QA team has voted on their own pkg-config policy which seems to even diverge from the devmanual policy. [3] 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] Reasons and actual breakages why this causes cross-distro problems can be seen here: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=694671 https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=715796 https://github.com/gusnan/devilspie2/commit/8bbc2f64bc2115178d5e1de170c1c1882eaf2799 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]. 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. These things affect more than just gentoo (and definitely other developers as well). -- [0] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/81591 [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=445618 [2] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=445130 [3] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Quality_Assurance/Meeting_Summaries#Hacked_pkgconfig_files [4] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=509392#c35 [5] http://sources.gentoo.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/gentoo-x86/dev-lang/lua/files/lua-5.1-make-r2.patch?hideattic=1&revision=1.1&view=markup&sortby=log [6] https://github.com/OpenRA/OpenRA/pull/5190#issuecomment-41884058