On Sun, 2003-09-28 at 20:43, Sander Striker wrote:
> > There is a patch that's been floating around in this discussion. It
> > modifies the javahl directory in the subversion/bindings/java.
> > Since *I* don't own the patch, I simply added it so that at least a
> > Mandrake JAVAHL RPM could be built. I will be removing it as soon as the
> > patch is finalized.
> Wait a minute. You are applying a big-mother-of-a-patch to a package,
> when the real place this belongs is the trunk? I'm sorry, but that is
> just plain silly. Try shepherding the patch into the trunk instead, so
> that all platforms can benefit. If the patch doesn't make it in, it
> probably is not a good patch, implying that the madrake package shouldn't
> carry it either.
Sander - this is the same patch that I've been helping test build in the
Mandrake RPM built set.
Am I not allowed to put it in while it's still in flux. I didn't change
it. I just used it as it was posted. To show that it works.
Everyone says "Put in your changes in the trunk". Patrick says he's
going to put the patch in shortly. We're in a dev area in the trunk
anyway. So what's the issue????
I got told I shouldn't do this in my own little work area. Did I
> Why didn't the previous Mandrake RPM maintainer have the same problems
> as you had.
Easy - he had macros littered over his system and only *he* could have
compiled them. Adding the little things that the so-called Mandrake
requirements ask you to, overrides Mandrake defaults. If you do it
wrong, you're in trouble. As can be seen as what happens if you try to
build the redhat-8+ set and then try to build a Mandrake SRPM - you'll
find that your build system isn't expected to be in /usr/src/RPM any
Your average Joe doesn't have to do this for a regular compile, thanks
to Greg's magic. Why should someone that uses RPM?
> > I've created an RPM build process that can be run by anyone.
> Is that necessary? Building RPMs is usually something that should be
> easy for packagers AFAIK.
Mandrake RPMs are buildable by everyone. That's the basis of opensource.
Mandrake publishes SRPMS regularly. Take any SRPM, and you can make a
new RPM from it.
As for packagers? The only packages I've ever seen were redhat. I only
volunteered to update the Mandrake build set because the current one was
nonfunctional and made non-Mandrake assumptions.
Try going into the redhat directory - I think you will find that you can
easily build a redhat RPM. But you might not be able to do a Mandraek
one immediately after - unless you're at the latest rev in which case it
RPMs are not exclusive territory. The only difference between a
sanctioned on and a non-sanctioned one is the GPG signature and only the
packager can put that in.
> And we have done the same replying and explaining things to you. Furthermore,
> this is not about you. This is about the project.
Ok. I guess I need clearer answers. Do you want me to go back through
all the log messages? Is that what I need to do?
> That's called review and feedback. Be glad you are in an open source
> project where people are being critical and are not afraid to tell their
I like criticism. But I'm not getting directions in a lot of cases. I
get a feedback but I don't know what to do with it. The next step isn't
> Can you tell me how this is relevant? What kind of reaction do you
> expect? FWIW, wining doesn't make the quality of your log messages any
> better. It doesn't make the comments go away. Improving does.
Ok. Explain to me if I haven't wanted to improve why I've tried to do
everything people have asked?
I need consensus and clarity. I'm suffering from a lack of both.
> The full committers body. And if you pass their quality control, the
> community will have nothing to complain about either in general.
Good. That's a great place to start. So you're saying EVERY person
listed in the COMMITERS file? Or the people with blanket commit
> Why are you the _only_ committer with this problem?
Because I haven't been reading this stuff for 3 years, and I'm used to
individual log messages per file during the commit process.
I WILL go back and rewrite the log messages starting from 6374.
Plan on seeing it posted here PRIOR to being changed.
I'll expect a consensus prior to posting. If I get no response w/in 7d
of posting, I will assume that it is correct.
Do you think I need to wait longer? Shorter?
Let me know.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Mon Sep 29 04:32:44 2003