WebHosting Paid by #1Payday.Loans
[00:50] daja77 (n=daja77@dslb-088-072-033-224.pools.arcor-ip.net) joined #rocklinux. [00:50] _BoS_ (n=BoS@dslb-088-072-037-239.pools.arcor-ip.net) left irc: Remote closed the connection [00:50] BoS (n=BoS@dslb-088-072-037-037.pools.arcor-ip.net) joined #rocklinux. [01:04] daja77_ (n=daja77@dslb-088-072-034-102.pools.arcor-ip.net) left irc: Read error: 110 (Connection timed out) [01:13] kasc_ (n=kasc@dslb-084-060-098-193.pools.arcor-ip.net) joined #rocklinux. [01:20] kasc (n=kasc@dslb-084-060-106-063.pools.arcor-ip.net) left irc: Read error: 110 (Connection timed out) [01:20] Nick change: kasc_ -> kasc [02:25] blindcod1r (n=blindcod@tor/session/x-1c31b14c462112fb) joined #rocklinux. [02:25] blindcoder (i=id@tor/session/x-781a46fb456194a3) left irc: Nick collision from services. [02:26] Nick change: blindcod1r -> blindcoder [03:55] daja77_ (n=daja77@dslb-088-072-033-224.pools.arcor-ip.net) joined #rocklinux. [04:02] daja77 (n=daja77@dslb-088-072-033-224.pools.arcor-ip.net) left irc: Read error: 110 (Connection timed out) [04:33] netrunner (n=andreas@anvame.net) left irc: Remote closed the connection [04:33] netrunner (n=andreas@anvame.net) joined #rocklinux. [05:20] madtux (i=miguel@pf0.hostarica.com) left irc: "Leaving" [07:04] <blindcoder> moin [07:22] <annesh> moin blindcoder [07:22] <blindcoder> moin annesh [07:22] <blindcoder> everything fine for todaY? [07:23] <annesh> i hope so... [07:23] <annesh> i'll see at 10 o'clock [07:23] <annesh> hmpf [07:25] <blindcoder> good luck! [07:25] <annesh> thanks :) [07:29] <blindcoder> anyway, I'm off to work now [07:29] <blindcoder> brb [08:12] <blindcoder> he [08:12] <blindcoder> re [09:05] andyrtr__ (n=andyrtr@p54B6B48A.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) joined #rocklinux. [09:21] andyrtr_ (n=andyrtr@p54B6B012.dip0.t-ipconnect.de) left irc: Read error: 110 (Connection timed out) [09:26] ija_ (n=ija@84.19.222.189) joined #rocklinux. [09:39] ija (n=ija@84.19.223.14) left irc: Read error: 110 (Connection timed out) [09:46] Nick change: ija_ -> ija [10:42] <annesh> re [10:53] owl (n=owl@193.93.28.218) joined #rocklinux. [10:56] <owl> moin [11:40] [raphael] (n=raphael@raphael.netpark.at) left irc: "using sirc version 2.211+KSIRC/1.3.12" [12:10] <blindcoder> clifford: smng_server? [12:11] <clifford> as discussed at CLT. [12:12] <blindcoder> must have missed it mentally [12:12] <th> oh clifford! [12:12] <th> you live! [12:13] <clifford> th: no. not really. [12:13] <clifford> I just checked in the stuff I had on my laptop.. [12:13] <th> clifford: you got mail [12:13] <th> clifford: at least 3 from my side [12:13] <clifford> yep. the sm/ssl stuff. [12:13] <th> yea [12:13] <clifford> I have no idea.. [12:14] <th> clifford: i bet that's something with our subversion build [12:14] <blindcoder> well, when I should pay attention, please tell me :) [12:14] <th> blindcoder: i tried to get all the funky sm stuff workin [12:15] <blindcoder> leather, lace and whips? [12:15] <blindcoder> note: I never used the sm command line tool [12:17] <th> blindcoder: me neither. [12:17] <th> blindcoder: but i tried to get it working [12:17] <th> blindcoder: but the perl-svn bindings are broken [12:17] <th> (i have submaster+swig+perl in my build) [12:18] <blindcoder> I see [12:18] <th> Can't load '/usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/5.8.7/i686-unknown-linux-gnu/auto/SVN/_Core/_Core.so' for module SVN::_Core: [12:18] <th> +/usr/lib/libsvn_ra_dav-1.so.0: undefined symbol: SSL_load_error_strings at [12:18] <th> that's the error [12:19] <blindcoder> oh [12:20] <th> clifford: perhaps you want to add a flag to patches "accepted" [12:20] <th> clifford: of course that would be the result of the approvals. but approval patterns might change [12:21] <th> clifford: but acceptance should be persistent [12:21] <clifford> th: full ack. [12:21] Action: blindcoder trying a fix for desktop files in forked packages [12:22] <clifford> accepted == applied? [12:22] <th> clifford: accepted is the requirement for being applied [12:22] <th> clifford: so the command-line tool we spoke of (e.g. cron job) would try to apply accepted patches [12:22] <clifford> thats the 'approved' thing. [12:23] <th> clifford: no [12:23] <clifford> but the open/accepted/rejected/discarded thing is missing. [12:23] <th> clifford: multiple apprivals might be necessary for acceptance [12:23] <clifford> no that's the votes. [12:23] <th> oh [12:23] <th> wait [12:23] <clifford> there can only be one approved by one person. [12:24] <clifford> the idea is that one person approves the patch and then it is applied automatically. [12:24] <th> nono [12:24] <clifford> nono? [12:24] <th> there are "votes" [12:24] <th> anyone can vote [12:24] <clifford> yes. like now. [12:24] <th> now patterns define which votes are approvals [12:24] <th> and how many approvals are necessary [12:24] <th> and if all approvals are given. it is accepted. [12:24] <clifford> ah! the patterns table is missing! [12:25] <th> that was the terminology i states in my mail [12:25] <clifford> mail? [12:25] <th> Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 15:15:50 +0100 [12:25] <th> From: Tobias Hintze <th@hbs-solutions.de> [12:25] <th> To: fake@rapidnetworks.de, clifford@clifford.at [12:25] <th> Subject: new-submaster-interface.txt [12:25] <clifford> when? [12:25] <th> 12:27:45 < th> Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 15:15:50 +0100 [12:26] <th> clifford: the distinction between "vote" and "approval" seems important to me. anyone can vote. but patterns define whoms vote is an approval [12:26] <th> clifford: an negative-approval would be a strong veto [12:26] <th> clifford: a negative vote is just a negative-vote [12:27] <clifford> ok. that's exactly how it is now and how I planed it. [12:28] <clifford> just the pattern thable is missing in the schema file right now. [12:28] <th> and a flag for acceptance. [12:28] <th> and.... [12:28] <th> . user_id_approver INTEGER NOT NULL [12:28] <th> a patch can have multiple approvers? [12:28] <clifford> yes. the state (open, rejected, applied, discarded). [12:29] <th> ok [12:29] <clifford> that's just mixing up terminologies because I didn't know your mail when I wrote that. [12:29] <th> ok [12:29] <th> very well [12:29] <th> just another thing regarding this. [12:29] <th> will patches be able to do svn meta ops? [12:29] <clifford> the database just needs to know about votes. [12:29] <th> svn rm [12:30] <clifford> that some votes are stronger than others is implied by the yet missing pattern table. [12:30] <clifford> on a file: yes. [12:30] <clifford> on a directory: no. [12:30] <clifford> (as it is now. [12:30] <th> ok - well, i could not get sm cmd-line util to work yet. [12:31] <clifford> the idea of the approved_by thing is that at the end one person still needs to push the "do it" button. [12:31] <th> that would always be the last person who is approving [12:31] <clifford> .. that can be done automatically for the extra packages, but not for stuff that changes core. [12:32] <th> ahhh [12:32] <th> yea [12:32] <th> i'm mixing up votes again. [12:32] <th> we need more than votes for approval [12:32] <th> cause votes happen before in-depth testing [12:34] <th> so voting is only like commenting and flagging for selection [12:35] <th> but we additionally need the approval-thing [12:35] <th> so my mail is not 100% correct. [12:38] <th> clifford: hmmm *idea* [12:38] <th> clifford: perhaps we could change vote_type ENUM('+', '-') [12:38] <th> clifford: into something with more than two options [12:39] <th> clifford: ENUM('+', '-', 'A', 'V') [12:39] <th> clifford: adding approval and veto [12:41] <clifford> and why is this better? [12:41] <clifford> afais only one approver is needed and I would prever the approving beeing different from voting to avoid usage errors. [12:43] <th> oh ok [12:43] <th> i'm fine with one approver [12:43] <th> i think i got that idea from you [12:43] <th> (the number of needed votes for each pattern) [12:45] <th> clifford: the patterns define who may give the approval, right? [12:45] <clifford> no. the patterns define which votes are recommended to be there before a patch is approved. [12:45] <th> ah ok [12:46] <th> so positive-vote-outcome is a requirement for approval. something like that [12:46] <clifford> patches to the non-core stuff (and no config, etc) are approved automatically when all recommended votes are there. [12:46] <th> ahh yes. good. [12:46] <clifford> its a recommendation, not a requirement. [12:46] <th> ok [12:47] <clifford> e.g. we also may approve a patch to a package owned by XY without waiting for XY to vote for it. [12:47] <th> i see [12:47] <th> well in that case i thought WE would vote for it [12:47] <clifford> [schema updated in svn] [12:48] <th> but having it as a recommandation only is fine with me too [12:48] <th> O D R A [12:48] <blindcoder> what if XY voted against the patch? [12:49] <blindcoder> sorry for interrupting... [12:49] <daja77_> re [12:49] <blindcoder> moin daja77_ [12:49] <th> blindcoder: than i see no reason for applying it. [12:50] <clifford> blindcoder: then we still can approve it. however: maybe we wouldn't make friends that way.. [12:50] <th> blindcoder: but i would see reason for arguing on the ML [12:50] <blindcoder> okay, that's what I wanted to know :) [12:50] <th> clifford: should Qs have stati? [12:50] <th> clifford: like "highly experimental", "open/closed" [12:52] <th> clifford: and what's the votepattern_user? [12:52] <th> clifford: ahhh that's a n:m [12:53] <blindcoder> on a totally unrelated topic: I'm uncertain what to do with the ksimus and licq packages [12:53] <th> clifford: forget the last question! [12:53] <blindcoder> fork vs. split [12:53] <blindcoder> atm. I make a compiletime decision to add the plugins to the package licq [12:54] <blindcoder> now: is it better to have licq licq:console licq:qt licq:kde or licq licq-console licq-qt licq-kde? [12:55] <th> for the user it's only a matter of ":" or "-". [12:55] <blindcoder> no [12:55] <blindcoder> rocket emerge licq vs rocket emerge licq{,-console,-qt,-kde} [12:56] <th> blindcoder: where would you put common files in the case of forking? [12:56] <blindcoder> licq [12:56] <th> ah - i can't read [12:57] <th> rocket emerge installs (by default) all splits? [12:57] <blindcoder> yes [12:57] <th> i see highly redundancy here. [12:57] <th> the main difference is in package creation only [12:57] <blindcoder> how so? [12:58] <blindcoder> the splits/forks would only contain the plugin files [12:58] <blindcoder> yes [12:58] <blindcoder> for most/all practical purposes, it doesn't matter [12:58] <blindcoder> but I think we should have a policy/best practice in this case [12:58] <th> so we have a forks and splits. but for the users. it's almost the same [12:58] <daja77_> i'd prefer split packages [12:58] <blindcoder> so one can expect the same behavior from all packages [12:59] <th> same here. [12:59] <blindcoder> okay, splits it is [12:59] <daja77_> forked packages would increase build time [12:59] <blindcoder> I'll add information for this to the wiki [12:59] <th> clifford: ok - so we can state the status in {queue,journal}_text [13:00] <clifford> yes. [13:00] <th> that's ok [13:00] <th> but who's able to change the text? [13:01] <clifford> journal_text will be the entire journal, the journal_patch table is automatically updated whenever journal_text changes. [13:01] <th> who's able to put a patch into a Q? [13:01] <clifford> hmm.. [13:01] <th> clifford: and journal_text may contain comments and all? [13:01] <clifford> journal is easy: the owner (and all admins) [13:01] <th> yea journal is easy [13:01] <th> but who put's patches into a q... [13:02] <th> patch creator perhaps [13:02] <clifford> I'm not sure. [13:02] <clifford> patch creator and admins? [13:02] <th> if that is enough... [13:02] <th> the more important question... [13:02] <th> if we only have q_text to state the status... [13:03] <th> then a q wont get closed [13:03] <th> so new patches could arrive [13:03] <th> hmmm [13:03] <th> would that hurt? perhaps not. [13:03] <th> blindcoder: btw - thanks a lot for polishing the wiki/doc [13:04] <blindcoder> th: that was stf, not me [13:04] <th> oups [13:04] <blindcoder> :) [13:04] <th> thanks to stf then. [13:06] <clifford> th: open www.rocklinux.org in konqeror and have a look at the nav bar. [13:06] <th> apropos [13:06] <th> clifford: the logo was NOT ok in konquerer before we did the change [13:07] <clifford> then I remember it incorrectly. [13:07] <th> clifford: the nav links miss aline on top? [13:08] <clifford> the entire nav thing is appended at the end of the page after the content. [13:08] <th> i can't confirm that [13:09] <th> https://thzn.de/shot.png [13:09] <daja77_> navbar is empty in konqueror here [13:09] <daja77_> ah right it is after the content [13:09] <clifford> www.clifford.at/priv/snapshot2.png [13:10] <daja77_> different versions of konqueror i guess [13:10] <daja77_> <- 3.4.2 [13:11] <clifford> 3.5.0 here [13:12] <th> 3.2.3 here ;) [13:12] <daja77_> guess that somehow [13:12] <th> so i've another reason for NOT updating ;) [13:16] <th> clifford: playing with the margin values should fix this i guess. i dont know why this happens. [13:16] <th> sucks [13:16] <th> clifford: perhaps anyone should be able to create Qs [13:17] <th> clifford: we could restrict it later. [13:17] <clifford> sure. [13:17] <th> clifford: if we get to many Qs [13:17] <clifford> we can remove Qs which aren't needed anymore. [13:17] <clifford> (maybe Qs should only be marked as removed?) [13:17] <th> if all patches in a Q are applied... it could remove itself [13:18] <th> yea [13:18] <th> we should delete NOTHING [13:18] <th> well spam perhaps [13:18] <clifford> .. and the grouping information is lost. [13:18] <th> if i say "remove" i mean "set state to removed" or something [13:18] <clifford> yes. so we need some kind of 'removed' flags in the database. [13:20] <th> yea [13:20] <clifford> I've now added queue_discarded and journal_discarded. [13:20] <clifford> And queue_discarded must only be set if no open patches are in the Q [13:21] <clifford> s/must only/may only/ ;-) [13:58] <th> hmmmm /usr/lib/libsvn_ra_dav-1.so.0 is not linked against libssl [14:03] <blindcoder> hmm [14:03] <blindcoder> I wonder why I added --disable-gpgme to licq [14:06] <daja77_> ./splrun: error while loading shared libraries: libpcre.so.0 [14:06] <daja77_> interesting [15:16] <blindcoder> splitdesc_rms() { desc_I="plugin for rms"; } [15:16] <blindcoder> splitreg 85 rms 'licq_rms.so' [15:16] <blindcoder> what is missing? [21:15] <th> this channel is idle for almost 6 hours now. [21:16] <annesh> re [00:00] --- Thu Mar 9 2006