From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AD451381FA for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2014 12:08:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E83C5E08BD; Sun, 1 Jun 2014 12:07:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DA397E08B0 for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2014 12:07:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.34] (56.red-80-28-182.adsl.static.ccgg.telefonica.net [80.28.182.56]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: pacho) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5E56133F87D for ; Sun, 1 Jun 2014 12:07:51 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <1401624467.790.21.camel@belkin5> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] alpha, ia64, ppc, ppc64, sparc developers, need your attention From: Pacho Ramos To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Date: Sun, 01 Jun 2014 14:07:47 +0200 In-Reply-To: <538B15C7.5070708@gentoo.org> References: <538B0C00.5010705@gentoo.org> <1401622402.790.16.camel@belkin5> <538B15C7.5070708@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Mailer: Evolution 3.12.2 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 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Archives-Salt: c358b5cb-aa9d-40f4-980e-1de72da8685e X-Archives-Hash: 2aae1779184c11a84e4250cce6adf31b El dom, 01-06-2014 a las 13:00 +0100, Markos Chandras escribió: > On 06/01/2014 12:33 PM, Pacho Ramos wrote: > > El dom, 01-06-2014 a las 14:18 +0300, Samuli Suominen escribió: > >> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=505962#c6 is blocking > >> stabilizing the new virtuals, and thus, converting the tree, and > >> also blocking stabilization of the already converted packages > >> (gnome seems to have some) pending for 3 months already > >> > >> thanks, samuli > >> > > > > This makes me wonder about the real status of some of this arches. > > I know that now we will probably see how Agostino goes ahead and > > does all the work (that is nice and I really welcome his work > > trying to keep this arches in shape), but also makes me thing if > > makes sense to keep this agostino-dependency for this arches more > > and more time. What will occur if he is not around sometime? :/ > > > > > > We have been through the same discussion not so long ago and the > result was to start dropping the ~m68k, s390 and sh to ~testing[1]. In > the thread that started it all[2] there has been no resistance about > dropping the keywords of these arches on $subject and here we are > again discussing the problem. Here[3] you can see council's decision. > I quote here just for fyi: > > "In summary: > - m68k, s390, sh: will be dropped to unstable keywords globally. > - alpha, ia64: Maintainers can remove older stable versions according > to the "package-by-package" proposal. > - sparc: No action. > " > So unless I make a mistake, you are free to start dropping alpha, ia64 > to ~arch. For ppc,ppc64 and sparc it's probably best to resurrect the > old thread and possible have add it to the agenda for the next meeting. > > [1] http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/88183 > [2] http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gentoo/dev/277054 > [3] > http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20130917-summary.txt > The problem arrives when even core components like udev takes so long to be handled :/ (and situation would be much worse if Agostino doesn't have time to make his mass stabilizations... well, each time I report a stabilization bug that affects me I cross my fingers expecting ago has enough time to handle them ;))