bad build system

[Lunks]

"I'm sorry to dissappoint you, but avant-window-navigator-extras has such a piss-poor buildsystem, that not one person on the team wants to maintain it, and thus we decided to drop it from the overlay."

That was the answer of my question to add awn-extras to a portage-overlay (Gentoo). I dont know how many work it is but it would be very nice if it would be change in next time. Why exists awn-extras and awn-extras-testing? No one are stable...

[Andrew Starr-Bochicchio (andrewsomething)]

Work has been done to begin improving the build system. If Gentoo developers have ideas or suggestions please direct them to the following spec or ask them to file a more detailed bug describing their issues.

https://blueprints.edge.launchpad.net/awn-extras/+spec/built-system

[Mark Lee (malept)]

As a longtime Gentoo user and overlay producer (but not of Awn and friends yet), I would love to know what the source of that quote is.

Given the nature of awn-extras (many applets with different authors in different states of stability), it is rather difficult to say "the tree is stable". We are currently exploring the option of splitting up the releases a la gst-plugins: supported (AKA stable) and unsupported (AKA unstable).

Also, in awn-extras-testing, there is a greatly simplified build system in place (written by myself). Something tells me that the Gentoo devs in question (I assume the quote came from a Gentoo dev) won't actually look at it, but whatever. This is what overlays are for.

[Mark Lee (malept)]

I found the link. For the record, it's <http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-4795703.html#4795703>.

> This is what overlays are for.

I take that back.

[Mark Lee (malept)]

I think that the build system has been proven to be sufficiently "not bad", given that there is now an awn-extras ebuild in the desktop-effects overlay. If any of the Gentoo developers wish to dispute that, they are more than welcome to discuss the validity of the original statement at <irc://irc.freenode.net/#awn>. Therefore, I'm marking this bug as invalid.