-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 07/17/2013 05:34 PM, hasufell wrote: > On 07/17/2013 11:28 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote: >> On 07/17/2013 05:17 PM, Chris Reffett wrote: >>> On 07/17/2013 04:57 PM, hasufell wrote: >>>> I know there was an announcement about the upcoming change to >>>> cmake-utils.eclass, however... it is not enough to give a >>>> deadline without caring if people actually fixed it by then. > >>>> By doing that you risk breaking stable packages which is not >>>> trivial. > >>>> You _must_ do a tinderbox run, test that stuff in an overlay or >>>> whatever. You are responsible for ALL reverse deps. > >>>> The way it was done... was not appropriate. Please be more >>>> careful next time. There are still incoming bugs about broken >>>> base_src_* calls. (see the tracker) > > >>> I discussed this with hasufell on IRC, but I'll lay out the >>> response on the list too. Yes, this was my fault. We (KDE team) >>> tested in our overlay, but none of the packages there use the >>> base_src_* calls, which is why it didn't come up in testing, and >>> I did not realize that there were packages that did rely on the >>> implicit base inherit to call base_src_* directly. > >> ...and that is why it isn't permitted to directly use an eclass >> that you don't inherit. While I agree testing could (should) have >> been better, the fact that people ignore the rules for writing >> ebuilds shouldn't entirely fall on the KDE team. > > > It doesn't matter in the slightest whos fault it is or who should be > blamed. > > It is about maintaining stability for the user. Especially when it > comes to stable ebuilds. > > That means the methods for eclass changes must be more thoroughly. > I completely agree with you, the changes should have been tested better. The ebuilds with these errors popping up ALSO should have been tested better. Considering this is a QA violation, perhaps it is possible to add a check in repoman for using something from an eclass which you didn't inherit. I doubt the slowdown would be horrible and clearly it would catch a huge number of QA violations.
I'm not saying this isn't bad, I'm not saying KDE team didn't mess up, I'm saying a lot of people messed up and the not well enough tested eclass change found a lot of QA violations which should have been caught much earlier. - -Zero -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJR5w/IAAoJEKXdFCfdEflKUQ4P/24f/wkmQHCFskq2P+b8xgpY PpRkE4XV/AV4oYRFWJ0HNmPcx1gqNVHdjED8yhQ8JqEPFJbgMWRMa1vfkY84Qkqb b4CIDcmCd1A9jkdFtP6llgCSP/ub0cokB9O1Cb5kAZrDy+VzctB81x6X2uuUF53N dcoVEga4gqZf5W4RBBE5R7yneB92K5bZjulQsPG22pAfWmKCoVUoaPOh4c104mXt r+qMboTdHhfNldYdTykKQy5wSMERpKxzPBw9sG3ON96qajSD9nnmVzCVmWZrixfG WJWf2G5RhLoIjjGPR0d9wUp5w212W7E6OVIpbeye5nX/YpePEYL4YAboAPbBs9Ws XRWJOpy+/+W4Wr7J+pic41S96w2r31kBoXRpR6+Qrn+JZAaWbRBMadqVhHnYJx+w cxOFhpKnJRF7l0t76wRevUMoD4aMRi3ZqEjH6SdqIJ9QHq40k6fITrmahq5k8Y24 TZOsGVpGi1XhrjrSfNXnVy9Dstjf5D6W39nzYQI+AaXURynV276fb/BPABHdoRuR 4eITAA6vIQ6rxoTAsOjmy+w2ySOzJkEVK0WrrcaJJAxhu1+ztjmcaq9d5kO7mdIt 5iyEcgNielhrf7wkpe+yM0SwhE5h1/+znhMRgxMAwuktWxK43KMBV39G28b9XMb6 LjG8NvQO4K4LGeNOhWAA =elf2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
