From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-project+bounces-1946-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1SWqcG-00038P-Gc
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 22 May 2012 15:03:17 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 22DF6E0B93
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Tue, 22 May 2012 15:03:16 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com (mail-bk0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA05EE0B92
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 22 May 2012 14:40:30 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by bkcjk13 with SMTP id jk13so5785249bkc.40
for <gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org>; Tue, 22 May 2012 07:40:26 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=09Sq8JZSyC8N+OlhTcvTDHrbPoq6b4Waqtyn3v0BxEU=;
b=PBFHV1jonrSQ4gf4YEranaePNp/2fbnWgVqgTnocD686q9mHrXyQhSPlXFG/DBUlv3
QsRX0lmbGbw4uk2pRrr1hpBZ7twgFIDg5dp4H+8vVOp15hsAC5KxnnRj5qM6U6pzfeMK
oHIqG3KQl2mkrvKTUMxh2XsAr4eCk5x99ZE/9R6iVYT3AdkgJRbqU6HIL/1yb7z343ky
cnCxyFK4UmIzR1NeHOnqdQAIogLM17jNU1zf/JLgv6M54xmT+DJBA40Qs4k72Y10DNad
ZR9z88wKCS5H6I92S3xdp1oDi6t8tiQ3Fx+bOZon8TFdKx5Jem2cwIHxSV0R5RA41X9x
TpdA==
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
Received: by 10.205.133.7 with SMTP id hw7mr9971377bkc.123.1337697626229; Tue,
22 May 2012 07:40:26 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com
Received: by 10.204.190.79 with HTTP; Tue, 22 May 2012 07:40:26 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4FBB9B43.60504@gentoo.org>
References: <CAET+hMTjHw-2f-0de=aUL=yiL19=xQf8W37Zer7eJctcjQOdaw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAA2qdGULN360JQwDWnikj9Rt0-BCb+eY=YJxperL0NHZVfvWfg@mail.gmail.com>
<CADqQcK47ksOBTWzLLWm66fj_WEX1vciBoSaYGuUeG2vJShH-bw@mail.gmail.com>
<CAET+hMRH6U_yTKdaww15+TBRDNuHttLFJKNJf3dH0H916bsisg@mail.gmail.com>
<4FBA2DE6.8070806@gentoo.org>
<CAGfcS_kX0YmY088gdqAuaGNJytb4J-5=p_Nx=nQAmcE31BVSvg@mail.gmail.com>
<4FBA78F9.8090904@gentoo.org>
<CAET+hMQxBuU_6RfXEj-8aN1gdOyxX7rA0jQ6zytPWdB+8+uNgQ@mail.gmail.com>
<4FBB9B43.60504@gentoo.org>
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 10:40:26 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: vEH-hdaOnhznH6oJ4kdk4R81EtE
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_nY8Gfh+dSOPrZBgYX2QyvTJdYAEZKs8sj1yYDdUPbTOA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Gentoo now has a Github "organization"
From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Archives-Salt: 3c0cc5e0-576f-4c2c-b9cd-f17521fc2325
X-Archives-Hash: c3ff77de977e197acea80458e3f82cf1
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 9:57 AM, Aaron W. Swenson <titanofold@gentoo.org> w=
rote:
> I don't understand how this would be painful. In my mind:
>
> =A0$ cp ~/github/collab/cat/pkgfile.ebuild ~/gentoo/gentoo-x86/cat/pkg/
> =A0$ cd ~/github/collab/cat/pkg
> =A0$ # Follow normal commit steps here.
Then realize that you just committed an ebuild that lacks some fix the
foo.eclass team quietly made to the previous ebuild when making some
tree-wide tweak.
In maintaining the mythtv ebuilds one of the things I've noticed is
that it is not always easy to keep tree ebuilds in sync with an
external overlay, because people do stuff to the tree all the time
without involving the maintainers. Usually these are relatively small
changes that are good from a quality perspective (often related to
dependencies/etc), or just stuff like package moves/virtuals/etc, but
the bottom line is that if you just merge some change from an overlay
without doing some checks you can end up with a regression.
So, if people are going to submit patches to help out it is best that
those patches be against what is actually in portage and not some
slowly diverging repository. The only way to really address this is
to somehow apply changes automatically back into the overlay, but that
has issues as well.
In a git-based world with easy branching/etc this would likely be less
of a problem...
Rich