Ticket #14796 (pike): please commit

[Guido Soranzio]

On Mar 31, 2008, at 6:53 PM, Rainer Müller wrote:
>
>> On trunk several pieces of Gnome 2.22 have been already committed
>> sparsely without coordination: almost a nightmare.
>
> Why is this a nightmare? Gnome ports got no maintainer, so others did
> what they could.

So did I: as I said, I am trying to rebuild gnome 2.22 from scratch
by applying the dependency chains suggested by garnome and jhbuild
one by one:

http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/garnome/trunk/
http://svn.gnome.org/viewvc/jhbuild/trunk/modulesets/

There is no coherency in how the dependencies are expressed
in MacPorts at the moment: some ports lists all the dependencies
recursively while other ones limit to list only their direct
dependencies, as garnome and jhbuild do the right way.

This is a mess. If we had some simple tools like a buildbot or
some "bulk" scripts like NetBSD's pkgsrc, the committers could
automatically upload a report listing the packages that they
already succeeded in building and the broken ones that they couldn't
upload into their open repository. The other contributors could
easily step up and help to spot the bug stopping the build process
by testing directly the uploaded binaries in a few minutes and not
hours.

I committed poppler 0.8.0 and it seems that I broke evince. If I
had access to the binary builds that other committers made available,
I could check instantly if I had broken also Gimp and Inkscape,
instead of having to recompile them for hours.

I had to recompile boost for hours to check why Inkscape was warning
about missing headers: if a binary of boost was made kindly
available by some other MacPorts nice guy, I could test easily
that issue by grabbing his packages from the "community" repository.

Now I am stopped at trying to create a new "gnome-settings-daemon"
but it is a difficult task because someone committed already the
unstable version of gnome-control-center 2.21, while other committers
already built some packages from the Gnome 2.22 stable branch, which
shouldn't have be done in advance without testing the new features
required at the base. I have to rebuild all that stuff again by myself,
which could be easily avoided if I could have a look at some
build logs made available by a buildbot or by other people sharing
them.


-Guido