From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 27107 invoked by uid 1002); 14 Apr 2003 11:04:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 31810 invoked from network); 14 Apr 2003 11:04:38 -0000 Date: Mon, 14 Apr 2003 13:04:36 +0200 From: Fredrik Jagenheim To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Message-ID: <20030414110436.GC441@pobox.com> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org References: <1050272714.30123.5.camel@localhost> <200304140100.51467.rainer.groesslinger@gmx.net> <20030414073218.GB441@pobox.com> <20030414170039.65dca9fe.citizen428@cargal.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030414170039.65dca9fe.citizen428@cargal.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.1i Sender: Fredrik Jagenheim Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Is there a process for marking ebuilds stable? X-Archives-Salt: 873adc3c-6a02-4417-bc7d-3ae55d27ac1d X-Archives-Hash: 00fffe5fb6c2bb1bde8c0f1bd1c6ebaf On Mon, Apr 14, 2003 at 05:00:39PM +0800, Michael Kohl wrote: > Also it maybe would be a nice thing to have a switch for this script to > automatically submit all packages which it finds where installed using > ~ARCH as "emerged sucessfully" (which I suppose they were if they land > in /var/db/pkg). This way it would be possible to set it up as a cronjob > so people (who are generally lazy from my experience) wouldn't have to > rate each package individually. Althoug this information is not quite as > good as "the full thing" but somehow I doubt all this people would be > running gentoo-stats if they had to do more then set up the crontab > once... You have several valid points. I agree that people are lazy and they would probably not run gentoo-stats if it wasn't croned. Although I don't see the need of a script that would check for if a package was emerged correctly. This could as well be done by emerge when it detects it is installing an ~ARCH package. This way you don't have to wonder if it's a 'current' package or not. Heck, you could use the same mechanism for reporting 'stable' packages when they fail. However, a successful emerge is only one of the critieria for an unstable package to move to stable. It not crashing runtime is another... Actually, the more I think of it, the whole point is moot... stable.gentoo.org might be a good idea, but why not replace it with stats.gentoo.org? If I submit a stat report which tells me that I have the latest version of a package installed, you could assume that it works for me. If not, I'd post a bugreport. And if I couldn't be arsed to set up gentoo-stats and post bugs about things that doesn't work, why would I use stable.gentoo.org anyway? Please, don't see this as an attack on stable.gentoo.org, just trying to see it in another perspective... And I probably missed something in that generalization... > Sorry for this rather long a quite unfocussed post, mid-term exams are > on the horizon again so I maybe should just shut up and grab my books... Exams are important, but so is gentoo. ;) //H -- To segfault is human; to bluescreen moronic. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list