| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
justin025
n00b
Joined: 01 Jul 2024
Posts: 4
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2024 2:33 pm Post subject: Pushing packages to guru |
 |
|
I would like to push a few ebuilds in my local overlay to guru but the regulations, specifically #9 here were a little vague. Could anyone more knowledgeable then me take a look at the ebuilds below and let me know if they qualify. I don't want to go through the process of registering as a contributor just for them to get rejected. I would be willing to maintain them and a few other unmaintained packages I use from guru.
I didn't upload metadata, but the use flags are pretty self explanatory.
www-client/mullvad-browser-bin-13.5
https://pastebin.com/rEJR4Eui
mail-client/betterbird-bin-115.12.0
https://pastebin.com/MHs9BdzE |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Nowa
Developer
Joined: 25 Jun 2014
Posts: 429
Location: Nijmegen
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2024 6:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
These ebuilds are absolutely fine.
Rule #9 exists to prevent ebuilds which, for example, do only the equivalent of "cd $DESTDIR; wget $SRC_URI". It is also intentionally a bit vague because it is very difficult to precisely define what crosses the line of being useless. The most important point of the rule is that you, as the author, have thought about "does this really have to be an ebuild?" and have found some reason for the answer to be yes.
_________________
OS: Gentoo 6.10.12-gentoo-dist, ~amd64, 23.0/desktop/plasma/systemd
MB: MSI Z370-A PRO
CPU: Intel Core i9-9900KS
GPU: Intel Arc A770 16GB & Intel UHD Graphics 630
SSD: Samsung 970 EVO Plus 2 TB
RAM: Crucial Ballistix 32GB DDR4-2400 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
szatox
Advocate
Joined: 27 Aug 2013
Posts: 3418
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 01, 2024 7:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | The most important point of the rule is that you, as the author, have thought about "does this really have to be an ebuild?" and have found some reason for the answer to be yes. |
So... is "I want those files to be tracked by portage" enough of a reason?
The counter-example of a wget script suggests a negative answer, but it is also a terrible example.... Don't use wget scripts.
_________________
Make Computing Fun Again |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Banana
Moderator
Joined: 21 May 2004
Posts: 1719
Location: Germany
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
justin025
n00b
Joined: 01 Jul 2024
Posts: 4
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2024 4:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AndrewAmmerlaan wrote: | These ebuilds are absolutely fine.
Rule #9 exists to prevent ebuilds which, for example, do only the equivalent of "cd $DESTDIR; wget $SRC_URI". It is also intentionally a bit vague because it is very difficult to precisely define what crosses the line of being useless. The most important point of the rule is that you, as the author, have thought about "does this really have to be an ebuild?" and have found some reason for the answer to be yes. |
Thanks for the help, I just have one question. I created a new gpg key and followed the guide here but am unable to add them to the keyserver, as a result my pull requests are marked as unverified. Do you know how I can go about uploading it? Thanks again |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sam_
Developer
Joined: 14 Aug 2020
Posts: 1948
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 03, 2024 4:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| szatox wrote: | | Quote: | | The most important point of the rule is that you, as the author, have thought about "does this really have to be an ebuild?" and have found some reason for the answer to be yes. |
So... is "I want those files to be tracked by portage" enough of a reason?
The counter-example of a wget script suggests a negative answer, but it is also a terrible example.... Don't use wget scripts. |
Such an ebuild may be okay locally but not necessarily of broader use to anybody, hence not worth putting in a communal repository - even if you want to publish it in your own. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Chiitoo
Administrator
Joined: 28 Feb 2010
Posts: 2727
Location: Here and Away Again
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Portage & Programming
