1:52 p.m.
2016-10-18 15:36 GMT+02:00 Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)rpmfusion.org>:
commit bb01bb1e4d390e5d61a697fba30f12c556c42a9e
Author: Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com>
Date: Tue Oct 18 08:36:45 2016 -0500
Remove files from scm as now an archive is provided.
@Richard,
Sorry, but I don't understand why you have forked akmods in your
namespace that way.
This is going to be more difficult to review the changes made.
To be reverted.
Thx
2:20 p.m.
New subject: Fwd: [akmods] Remove files from scm as now an archive is provided.
2016-10-18 15:36 GMT+02:00 Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)rpmfusion.org>:
commit bb01bb1e4d390e5d61a697fba30f12c556c42a9e
Author: Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com>
Date: Tue Oct 18 08:36:45 2016 -0500
Remove files from scm as now an archive is provided.
@Richard,
Sorry, but I don't understand why you have forked akmods in your
namespace that way.
This is going to be more difficult to review the changes made.
To be reverted.
Thx
--
-
Nicolas (kwizart)
2:45 p.m.
New subject: [akmods] Remove files from scm as now an archive is provided.
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com> wrote:
2016-10-18 15:36 GMT+02:00 Richard Shaw
<hobbes1069(a)rpmfusion.org>:
> commit bb01bb1e4d390e5d61a697fba30f12c556c42a9e
> Author: Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com>
> Date: Tue Oct 18 08:36:45 2016 -0500
>
> Remove files from scm as now an archive is provided.
@Richard,
Sorry, but I don't understand why you have forked akmods in your
namespace that way.
This is going to be more difficult to review the changes made.
Sergio and I thought it was a good idea as SCM != Upstream and to give it a
proper home. I don't see how it really makes anything more difficult, the
changes are in github.
If you would rather support it, that's fine with me, I only took it because
it was unmaintained and I needed it for the nvidia drivers.
Thanks,
Richard
3:09 p.m.
New subject: [akmods] Remove files from scm as now an archive is provided.
2016-10-18 16:45 GMT+02:00 Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com>:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Nicolas Chauvet
<kwizart(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2016-10-18 15:36 GMT+02:00 Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)rpmfusion.org>:
> > commit bb01bb1e4d390e5d61a697fba30f12c556c42a9e
> > Author: Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com>
> > Date: Tue Oct 18 08:36:45 2016 -0500
> >
> > Remove files from scm as now an archive is provided.
> @Richard,
>
> Sorry, but I don't understand why you have forked akmods in your
> namespace that way.
> This is going to be more difficult to review the changes made.
Sergio and I thought it was a good idea as SCM != Upstream and to give it a
proper home. I don't see how it really makes anything more difficult, the
changes are in github.
Yep, but this was totally unannounced changes, so you have
failed an
important step at making free software, the advertising part.
I was not able to review the changes made even if I'm co-admin of the
package. So this is making the workflow harder.
Furthermore, if there is really a need to have a separate repos, which
I still fails to see any argument for, this has to be made in the
rpmfusion-infra namespace, like others projects do.
(until we have a better location such as a public git.rpmfusion.org
running pagure or else).
If you would rather support it, that's fine with me, I only took
it because
it was unmaintained and I needed it for the nvidia drivers.
Yeah, that's always
like that, don't worry I took the infra to
maintain for the very same reason.
Above all, I'd like theses kind of changes to be peer reviewed. This
is how a community repo can hold, if not this is only an aggregate of
first to come ideas.
Thx
--
-
Nicolas (kwizart)
4:46 p.m.
New subject: [akmods] Remove files from scm as now an archive is provided.
On Ter, 2016-10-18 at 09:45 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Nicolas Chauvet
<kwizart(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
> 2016-10-18 15:36 GMT+02:00 Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)rpmfusion.org>:
> > commit bb01bb1e4d390e5d61a697fba30f12c556c42a9e
> > Author: Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com>
> > Date: Tue Oct 18 08:36:45 2016 -0500
> >
> > Remove files from scm as now an archive is provided.
> @Richard,
>
> Sorry, but I don't understand why you have forked akmods in your
> namespace that way.
> This is going to be more difficult to review the changes made.
>
Sergio and I thought it was a good idea as SCM != Upstream and to
give it a proper home. I don't see how it really makes anything more
difficult, the changes are in github.
yes, I supported the idea, akmods should have a upstream source like
others packages, kmodtool too , maybe we may put it in
https://github.com/rpmfusion-infra
If you would rather support it, that's fine with me, I only took
it
because it was unmaintained and I needed it for the nvidia drivers.
Agree , I don't see any support since 2009 by Thorsten Leemhuis
Thanks,
Richard
--
Sérgio M. B.
5:59 p.m.
New subject: [akmods] Remove files from scm as now an archive is provided.
2016-10-18 18:46 GMT+02:00 Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com>:
On Ter, 2016-10-18 at 09:45 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > 2016-10-18 15:36 GMT+02:00 Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)rpmfusion.org>:
> > > commit bb01bb1e4d390e5d61a697fba30f12c556c42a9e
> > > Author: Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com>
> > > Date: Tue Oct 18 08:36:45 2016 -0500
> > >
> > > Remove files from scm as now an archive is provided.
> > @Richard,
> >
> > Sorry, but I don't understand why you have forked akmods in your
> > namespace that way.
> > This is going to be more difficult to review the changes made.
> >
> Sergio and I thought it was a good idea as SCM != Upstream and to
> give it a proper home. I don't see how it really makes anything more
> difficult, the changes are in github.
yes, I supported the idea, akmods should have a upstream source like
others packages, kmodtool too , maybe we may put it in
https://github.com/rpmfusion-infra
Well, you support the idea, but you still
don't say why ?
To me this looks harder as we need to maintain ACL from the package
and from the "upstream" sources.
On large project, this seems appropriate, but on akmods/kmodtool are
are lighter, it's just hide things behind another step.
With the current layout, we can have the akmods project forked in
github from the package, and no worry if we are a rpms fork or the
"upstream" project.
We are also reducing the reviewer range by removing the commit log
from this project. Most people on this list might be more or less
interested in kmod anyway.
And for what is upstream concerned, I think the real upstream of
kmodtool/akmods should be "rpm" itself.
@Richard, so thx for having reverted the change and for taking care of
theses tools.
--
-
Nicolas (kwizart)
6:39 p.m.
New subject: [akmods] Remove files from scm as now an archive is provided.
On Ter, 2016-10-18 at 19:59 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
2016-10-18 18:46 GMT+02:00 Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com>:
>
> On Ter, 2016-10-18 at 09:45 -0500, Richard Shaw wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 9:20 AM, Nicolas Chauvet <kwizart(a)gmail.c
> > om>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > 2016-10-18 15:36 GMT+02:00 Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)rpmfusion.o
> > > rg>:
> > > >
> > > > commit bb01bb1e4d390e5d61a697fba30f12c556c42a9e
> > > > Author: Richard Shaw <hobbes1069(a)gmail.com>
> > > > Date: Tue Oct 18 08:36:45 2016 -0500
> > > >
> > > > Remove files from scm as now an archive is provided.
> > > @Richard,
> > >
> > > Sorry, but I don't understand why you have forked akmods in
> > > your
> > > namespace that way.
> > > This is going to be more difficult to review the changes made.
> > >
> > Sergio and I thought it was a good idea as SCM != Upstream and to
> > give it a proper home. I don't see how it really makes anything
> > more
> > difficult, the changes are in github.
> yes, I supported the idea, akmods should have a upstream source
> like
> others packages, kmodtool too , maybe we may put it in
> https://github.com/rpmfusion-infra
Well, you support the idea, but you still don't say why ?
To me this looks harder as we need to maintain ACL from the package
and from the "upstream" sources.
On large project, this seems appropriate, but on akmods/kmodtool are
are lighter, it's just hide things behind another step.
With the current layout, we can have the akmods project forked in
github from the package, and no worry if we are a rpms fork or the
"upstream" project.
We are also reducing the reviewer range by removing the commit log
from this project. Most people on this list might be more or less
interested in kmod anyway.
And for what is upstream concerned, I think the real upstream of
kmodtool/akmods should be "rpm" itself.
I think we should merge kmodtool in akmods and put the sources
in rpmfusion-infra.
If we want develop akmods we will develop in cgit ? (doesn't make sense
to me )
Also I'd like add buildsys-build-rpmfusion to an archive, to have one
picture of all akmods system, am I missing any piece (of akmods system)
?
Disable akmods-shutdown by default ? why ? I don't agree and where is
the bug report ?
Another note, I haven't give up on idea of have akmods package in main
package and reformulate all akmods2, maybe do an akmods3 but my ideas
still just ideas that I have and also I have many things to do before.
@Richard, so thx for having reverted the change and for taking care
of
theses tools.
That is why I agreed with Richard, he have maintain it, so I think he
is allowed to archive it .
Best regards,
--
Sérgio M. B.
7:22 p.m.
New subject: [akmods] Remove files from scm as now an archive is provided.
2016-10-18 20:39 GMT+02:00 Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com>:
...
I think we should merge kmodtool in akmods and put the sources
in rpmfusion-infra.
What ?! this is totally insane and you failed to even provide
a
rational behind that.
Those are of course totally separate tools, I'm still using only
kmodtool only for building pre-built kmod.
If we want develop akmods we will develop in cgit ? (doesn't make
sense
to me )
Are we developing in cgit for packages already ? we are developing
with git, and our bug report tool is bugzilla.rpmfusion.org
So we even more already have github for forwarding source, so others
can fork from there, bug bugreport are disabled "on purpose" to avoid
duplicate report from bugzilla.rpmfusion.org as this is our own tool.
Also I'd like add buildsys-build-rpmfusion to an archive, to have
one
picture of all akmods system, am I missing any piece (of akmods system)
?
This is again a totally unbacked idea, it's just going to make more
step without any benefit.
Disable akmods-shutdown by default ? why ? I don't agree and
where is
the bug report ?
It was talked here:
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4024#c7 and here
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3977
--
-
Nicolas (kwizart)
8:12 p.m.
New subject: [akmods] Remove files from scm as now an archive is provided.
On Ter, 2016-10-18 at 21:22 +0200, Nicolas Chauvet wrote:
2016-10-18 20:39 GMT+02:00 Sérgio Basto <sergio(a)serjux.com>:
...
>
> I think we should merge kmodtool in akmods and put the sources
> in rpmfusion-infra.
What ?! this is totally insane and you failed to even provide a
rational behind that.
kmodtool is one script , why we have one package for one script ?
Those are of course totally separate tools,
no, in my point of view they are part of same akmods system, maybe
could be a sub-package, I don't know , but since we are discuss this, I
just give my ideas , looks to me a way to more organized (all akmods
tools in one src.rpm ) .
I'm still using only
kmodtool only for building pre-built kmod.
>
> If we want develop akmods we will develop in cgit ? (doesn't make
> sense
> to me )
Are we developing in cgit for packages already ? we are developing
with git, and our bug report tool is bugzilla.rpmfusion.org
So we even more already have github for forwarding source, so others
can fork from there, bug bugreport are disabled "on purpose" to avoid
duplicate report from bugzilla.rpmfusion.org as this is our own tool.
>
> Also I'd like add buildsys-build-rpmfusion to an archive, to have
> one
> picture of all akmods system, am I missing any piece (of akmods
> system)
> ?
This is again a totally unbacked idea, it's just going to make more
step without any benefit.
I'm trying collect all pieces of akmods system, buildsys-build-
rpmfusion is also part of that system and also have sources (scripts)
in rpm like akmods (and kmodtool), IMHO also should be archived in git
repo outside on rpmfusion-scm .
> Disable akmods-shutdown by default ? why ? I don't agree and
where
> is
> the bug report ?
It was talked here:
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4024#c7 and here
https://bugzilla.rpmfusion.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3977
OK I miss that , I'm going reply there .
--
Sérgio M. B.
2950
days inactive
2950
days old
rpmfusion-developers@lists.rpmfusion.org
8 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Nicolas Chauvet -
Richard Shaw -
Sérgio Basto