From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4630 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2003 04:00:46 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (128.193.0.39) by eagle.gentoo.oregonstate.edu with DES-CBC3-SHA encrypted SMTP; 29 Dec 2003 04:00:46 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([128.193.0.34] helo=eagle.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.24) id 1AaoaE-0003b0-6C for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Mon, 29 Dec 2003 04:00:46 +0000 Received: (qmail 29596 invoked by uid 50004); 29 Dec 2003 04:00:44 +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 32417 invoked from network); 29 Dec 2003 04:00:43 +0000 Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 04:00:40 +0000 From: Tom Payne To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-ID: <20031229040040.GC9146@tompayne.org> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline X-Really-From: Tom Payne User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.5.1i Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Please do not stabilize packages for arches you cannot test for X-Archives-Salt: 0b060efb-dfc7-4f08-8648-97542336c7d5 X-Archives-Hash: 1aa300c6e9043ad6aa8d4f417cba1e66 A pertinent discussion. I inadvertently broke the sparc tree by marking what I thought was a architecture-independent script (net-www/raggle) as being stable. The problem was that one of it's dependencies (dev-lang/ruby-1.8.0) was still unstable on sparc. I thought repoman would find problems like this but the version I have doesn't. Oops. Damage now undone and lesson learned. But it seems to me that there is a simple fix that would easy the burden on arch teams to test every single package for their arch. I advocate this only for ebuilds unlikely to cause problems, e.g. scripts and documentation. I propose: An ebuild that is unlikely to cause problems can be MARKED stable on relevant arches, even if the dev is unable to actually test it. An ebuild is only CONSIDERED stable on an arch if it, and all its dependencies, are marked stable on that arch. Problems solved: Arch leads no longer have to test every single ebuild that comes there way -- non x86 arches get package updates quicker with reduced workload for arch leads. No need to write unit tests for packages to help arch leads (lots of work and hard to do in some cases (e.g. interactive progs)). Marking packages stable can no longer break dependencies. New problems: Might result in broken software being installed. Feedback please. I advocate this approach for 'minor' packages, i.e. nothing fundamental to the working of the system. It's more suitable for scripting language libraries and minor applications (e.g. obscure window managers). Regards, Tom P.S. I'm off skiing for a couple of weeks and so will only be able to lurk on this discussion via gmane.org. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list