Date: Sun, 21 Jan 2024 13:27:04 -0500 From: "Mikhail T." <mi+t@virtual-estates.net> To: Daniel Engberg <daniel.engberg.lists@pyret.net> Cc: Kurt Jaeger <pi@freebsd.org>, ports-committers@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-all@freebsd.org, dev-commits-ports-main@freebsd.org Subject: Re: git: b430a140c818 - main - net-im/purple-gowhatsapp: add WhatsApp plugin for libpurple Message-ID: <df410abd-dd00-4e7e-83eb-f8a95ec15b9f@virtual-estates.net> In-Reply-To: <21dcca053d36f9bec4005ffb18897f51@mail.infomaniak.com> References: <202401202030.40KKUApC045320@gitrepo.freebsd.org> <f22ba5fb94cbee57ef6dbac2bdb3db87@mail.infomaniak.com> <f74f9837-121e-47ac-819b-27a40d3b4891@virtual-estates.net> <ewlhhqgckfoo4nj2jmryynhh2admdz6wy3lwkyav7nvhok565l@liht5kzkacig> <7e07375b-32bc-4778-8977-d87d6e135679@virtual-estates.net> <ptq5dukjavkfpoe2gic6mssywdxh7f77xsounaxmy5llxinz2j@w6243b7unduq> <8ab62f5f-bb62-4633-9d1c-d7a8a8e1fc8a@virtual-estates.net> <Zaz0W9odSaxyDrCj@fc.opsec.eu> <13433172-a8cb-494c-a435-fd4d8418a2e6@virtual-estates.net> <21dcca053d36f9bec4005ffb18897f51@mail.infomaniak.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------fp5sJ79OrRTYKnsYwa0JJtBi
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
21.01.24 06:11, Daniel Engberg:
> While neither Porters Handbook or Committers Guide say it's a
> requirement it's quite strongly suggested that you do use it.
Thank you, Daniel, for confirming, no actual rules were broken by my commit.
> Given that all pkg-fallout mails are from Poudriere it's more or less
> implied as committer to use it.
I don't see the implication at all. I appreciate the fallout e-mails,
but I don't see, why that makes it mandatory for me to use the same
tool(s) locally. For example, the cluster builds every port on multiple
hardware platforms -- for different OS-releases. Does that imply the
committers also must have such multitude of different hardware/release
combinations locally too?
I still don't understand, why you asked me to backout... Mat's attempt
at answering amounted to: "Because you broke the rules!" -- which is not
a valid reason even if any rules really were broken. Clearly a personal
thing...
If the 37 seconds it took the cluster to fail the port is really such a
drain on the resources, marking the port BROKEN would be a thing to do
-- that's a one-line change, that still keeps the code available for
sharing.
Anyway, I think, I hacked the port into pre-fetching the additional
modules using go.mk's facilities, and will be committing that shortly.
It still is not perfect, because the port is a mixture of C and Go-code,
but it should build fine now. Thank you for the feedback. Yours,
-mi
--------------fp5sJ79OrRTYKnsYwa0JJtBi
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">21.01.24 06:11, Daniel Engberg:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:21dcca053d36f9bec4005ffb18897f51@mail.infomaniak.com">While
neither Porters Handbook or Committers Guide say it's a
requirement it's quite strongly suggested that you do use it.</blockquote>
<p> </p>
<p>Thank you, Daniel, for confirming, no actual rules were broken by
my commit.</p>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:21dcca053d36f9bec4005ffb18897f51@mail.infomaniak.com">Given
that all pkg-fallout mails are from Poudriere it's more or less
implied as committer to use it.</blockquote>
<p>I don't see the implication at all. I appreciate the fallout
e-mails, but I don't see, why that makes it mandatory for me to
use the same tool(s) locally. For example, the cluster builds
every port on multiple hardware platforms -- for different
OS-releases. Does that imply the committers also must have such
multitude of different hardware/release combinations locally too?<br>
</p>
<p> I still don't understand, why you asked me to backout... Mat's
attempt at answering amounted to: "Because you broke the rules!"
-- which is not a valid reason even if any rules really were
broken. Clearly a personal thing... <br>
</p>
<p>If the 37 seconds it took the cluster to fail the port is really
such a drain on the resources, marking the port BROKEN would be a
thing to do -- that's a one-line change, that still keeps the code
available for sharing.<br>
</p>
<p>Anyway, I think, I hacked the port into pre-fetching the
additional modules using <font face="monospace">go.mk</font>'s
facilities, and will be committing that shortly. It still is not
perfect, because the port is a mixture of C and Go-code, but it
should build fine now. Thank you for the feedback. Yours,</p>
<blockquote>
<p>-mi<br>
</p>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
--------------fp5sJ79OrRTYKnsYwa0JJtBi--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?df410abd-dd00-4e7e-83eb-f8a95ec15b9f>