From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1EC1oK-0002Zh-0r for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 04 Sep 2005 21:13:56 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j84L9C0Y006007; Sun, 4 Sep 2005 21:09:12 GMT Received: from mail.rwisp.com (webmail.rwisp.com [208.191.32.9]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j84L7EM9023923 for ; Sun, 4 Sep 2005 21:07:15 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.rwisp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A6F33EA998 for ; Sun, 4 Sep 2005 16:10:26 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mail.rwisp.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 25418-16 for ; Sun, 4 Sep 2005 16:10:21 -0500 (CDT) Received: from 129-kids.homershut.net (linux.homershut.net [64.216.105.3]) (using SSLv3 with cipher RC4-MD5 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.rwisp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D4B4BEA2A4 for ; Sun, 4 Sep 2005 16:10:20 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] tentative x86 arch team glep From: Homer Parker To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <431B5BC6.50305@gentoo.org> References: <20050904143711.GD23576@dst.grantgoodyear.org> <20050904194141.4059a55e@snowdrop.home> <20050904191609.GE23576@dst.grantgoodyear.org> <1125864664.11360.107.camel@mogheiden.gnqs.org> <431B5BC6.50305@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 04 Sep 2005 16:10:06 -0500 Message-Id: <1125868207.19199.4.camel@localhost> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.2.3 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at rwisp.com X-Archives-Salt: 0198df5d-6282-4348-bcc6-633fdb9dc317 X-Archives-Hash: 8d6a6882aceb17ceea7f6d8d01284774 On Sun, 2005-09-04 at 14:40 -0600, Joshua Baergen wrote: > A possible way to alleviate this is proactivity on the maintainer's > part. Our current rule for going testing->stable is 30 days. If we > could alert the arch teams x number of days in advance they could > test > it before the end of the period minimizing delays. Since all arch > teams > would need this alert a relevant script could be created/modified. That's where having some devs/ATs running stable, and others running testing really helps.. That and chroots for core packages going from package.masked to testing. It's worked well for amd64 that way. -- Homer Parker Gentoo/AMD64 Arch Tester Strategic Lead hparker@gentoo.org -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list