From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1L28Wj-0000NL-Sf for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:08:46 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1F1DCE03DC; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:08:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.libexec.de (omega.libexec.de [85.214.68.240]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB79EE03DC for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:08:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.libexec.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 54244400E for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:04:36 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at libexec.de Received: from mail.libexec.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (omega.libexec.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rq-Lyt5L0rY3 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:04:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.0.60] (dslb-088-076-149-240.pools.arcor-ip.net [88.76.149.240]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: tobias) by mail.libexec.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1AD1F4002 for ; Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:04:33 +0100 (CET) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal for how to handle stable ebuilds From: Tobias Scherbaum To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <20081115130210.GA4219@pluto> References: <20081110181334.GD7038@aerie.halcy0n.com> <1226597916.3918.22.camel@homer.ob.libexec.de> <20081115130210.GA4219@pluto> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-uf4dY6jRXSz8sDU4dXvM" Date: Mon, 17 Nov 2008 19:08:39 +0100 Message-Id: <1226945319.3939.30.camel@homer.ob.libexec.de> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.22.3.1 X-Archives-Salt: 25de12f5-8294-46fc-92bb-55d47a1f217d X-Archives-Hash: 867c8d2c63f46cc0f8c88216929d7911 --=-uf4dY6jRXSz8sDU4dXvM Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Matti Bickel wrote: > Tobias Scherbaum wrote: > > What if this would break deps or it's a very common package for example > > belonging to the set of system packages? >=20 > Then the maintainer moans and does nothing. I guess that's where the > "MAY" part from above comes in. Policy should not be an excuse to stop > thinking. And if i break a user system when i drop my stable keywords, > IMHO i'm violating the 'work as pleasently and efficiently as possible' > bit of our philosophy. That would people require to use common sense. The past has shown that people tend to have different views of what common sense might be in a given case. Therefore policy in that aspect needs to be as clear and understandable as possible to avoid unnecessary discussions. > So bottom-line: i'm very much in favour of your solution to question #1. > And i'd like to stress the "automatic" bit. Yes, we can get access to > tinderboxes. But last i looked, this involved tracking down the person > responsible for it, asking for access and doing everything you need to > get your package to compile. Well, i'm lazy, so i didn't do it. >=20 > Automatic tinderbox testing would very much help in the process. Maybe > someone can write a script so that once a maintainer opens/gives his OK > to a stable bug, automatic testing could be started and the results > posted back to the bug? Sounds like a very good and doable idea to me. Process might be as easy as CC'ing a arch-tinderbox on a bug, a script does parse the bug number out of the mail being sent out and using gatt it catches the ebuild to test, compiles it and reports back a) failure/success, b) error log as attachment if it fails plus c) if there was a test-phase. Might be just a quick hack using pybugz and gatt :) > After the timeframe (30 days? 60? I don't know, and it's not important > at this point) maintainers could move to stable their package themself > IF the automatic tests indicate success AND no arch member has spoken > up. Agreed. Tobias --=20 Gentoo Linux - Die Metadistribution http://www.mitp.de/5941 http://www.metadistribution.eu https://www.xing.com/profile/Tobias_Scherbaum --=-uf4dY6jRXSz8sDU4dXvM Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABECAAYFAkkhsycACgkQX2bdwDDA8AVpHgCeLQ30SuqDMxbwnd9OISe7jWME wVIAn2gOQtaEKFKUTBdPYba/G68ucW4P =Vtrq -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-uf4dY6jRXSz8sDU4dXvM--