From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8638 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2004 03:22:46 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 26 Aug 2004 03:22:46 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1C0Aqc-0002tk-0t for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 26 Aug 2004 03:22:46 +0000 Received: (qmail 7007 invoked by uid 89); 26 Aug 2004 03:22:45 +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 20739 invoked from network); 26 Aug 2004 03:22:44 +0000 Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 21:22:37 -0600 From: Jason Wever To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-ID: <20040825212237.525af76a@voyager.weeve.org> In-Reply-To: <1093441861.31835.9.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> References: <1093441861.31835.9.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 0.9.12a (GTK+ 1.2.10; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha1"; boundary="Signature=_Wed__25_Aug_2004_21_22_37_-0600_nFN+bdHSzOQjLv_K" Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Ebuild bumping policy wrt KEYWORDS X-Archives-Salt: a4cb66f3-21df-42e8-94f5-cb8f0bcd251e X-Archives-Hash: fe33deb5f785b5e86a7ae023b458cd19 --Signature=_Wed__25_Aug_2004_21_22_37_-0600_nFN+bdHSzOQjLv_K Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Wed, 25 Aug 2004 09:51:02 -0400 Chris Gianelloni wrote: > At the same time, I've heard that we should never KEYWORD *anything* > which we cannot test for ourselves. This has been my general way of > doing things. When I commit a new version of a package, I only KEYWORD > it for the arches I can test for, then I send a test request to the > remaining arches. > > Which is the preferred method? It's sort of both. According to http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/devrel/handbook/handbook.xml?part=2&chap=5#doc_chap2, if an ebuild had an ~arch or arch keyword in the previous version, the policy is to make it ~arch in the new version. If for some reason the package maintainer is of the impression the new version would break a given arch, they may omit the arch from the new version and request the arch test out the package. If the keyword didn't exist before and you can't test for it a given arch, then yeah, don't keyword it lest we let jforman out of his cage again. -- Jason Wever Gentoo/Sparc Team Co-Lead --Signature=_Wed__25_Aug_2004_21_22_37_-0600_nFN+bdHSzOQjLv_K Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFBLVd9dKvgdVioq28RAkhbAJ0XOzPwf6+LXmHpBngegPWHz4horwCfQJhw 623hyWffjpuTPC8Aoip4Q8g= =5G4a -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Signature=_Wed__25_Aug_2004_21_22_37_-0600_nFN+bdHSzOQjLv_K--