From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N6mhI-0001k9-GJ for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 07 Nov 2009 14:55:24 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CBA41E076E; Sat, 7 Nov 2009 14:55:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A949DE0768 for ; Sat, 7 Nov 2009 14:55:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.35] (unknown [77.246.104.171]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4476E67D48 for ; Sat, 7 Nov 2009 14:55:21 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Improve policy of stabilizations From: Peter Volkov To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: <4AF49E3E.30307@gentoo.org> References: <200911011736.38401.Arfrever@gentoo.org> <20091102151707.0b155aab@gentoo.org> <200911021724.01069.hwoarang@gentoo.org> <20091103191005.18d98e2e@gentoo.org> <4AF1EBD8.4020502@gentoo.org> <20091104214823.64842abd@gentoo.org> <20091105091700.GA17478@eric.schwarzvogel.de> <4AF331B0.4020108@gentoo.org> <8b4c83ad0911060618r2b61c4b4w51238306b9c9a437@mail.gmail.com> <20091106144535.GT1150@gentoo.org> <4AF49E3E.30307@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Date: Sat, 07 Nov 2009 17:54:25 +0300 Message-ID: <1257605665.8341.1314.camel@tablet> 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 2.28.1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: dc849e28-6599-4af4-bd83-4a8bbbdb7e23 X-Archives-Hash: fcee2cfe1955c9e8cf6b113ca93b2753 =D0=92 =D0=9F=D1=82=D0=BD, 06/11/2009 =D0=B2 14:07 -0800, Zac Medico =D0=BF= =D0=B8=D1=88=D0=B5=D1=82: > Fabian Groffen wrote: > > On 06-11-2009 19:48:16 +0530, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote: > >> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 1:42 AM, Petteri R=C3=A4ty wrote: > >>> In the past when smaller arches were not that active we used to mar= k > >>> Java packages stable after testing by at least one arch team. The > >>> probability to find arch specific issues in something like Java is = not > >>> so high so I think arrangements like this are acceptable when the a= rch > >>> teams have problems keeping up. > >> I think the same should be extended to other languages such as Perl > >> and Python (unless they have portions which are C/C++) > >=20 > > Sounds like we could benefit from the "noarch" approach known in the = RPM > > world, such that all these packages can also be immediately keyworded > > and stabilised for all arches. Would greatly simplify things for a > > great deal of packages, maybe? >=20 > We could introduce "noarch" and "~noarch" KEYWORDS, add "noarch" to > the default ACCEPT_KEYWORDS setting for all profiles, and instruct > unstable users to add "~noarch" to ACCEPT_KEYWORDS. Looks like this will not work for all noarch packages. Stardict dictionary itself is noarch, but it RDEPENDS on stardict package which is keyworded only on some archs. So we'll be forced either to keyword stardict on all archs or we need to introduce some new way to work with such situations. --=20 Peter.