From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1G9IaM-0003ik-5r for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 05 Aug 2006 09:36:46 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with SMTP id k759ZtiL013909; Sat, 5 Aug 2006 09:35:55 GMT Received: from mail-relay-3.tiscali.it (mail-relay-3.tiscali.it [213.205.33.43]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.7/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k759XxDJ029156 for ; Sat, 5 Aug 2006 09:33:59 GMT Received: from c1358217.kevquinn.com (84.222.84.87) by mail-relay-3.tiscali.it (7.3.110.2) id 44D2255700025FAF for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 5 Aug 2006 11:33:59 +0200 Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2006 11:33:39 +0200 From: "Kevin F. Quinn" To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Make FEATURES=test the default Message-ID: <20060805113339.3b4a0569@c1358217.kevquinn.com> In-Reply-To: <44D3E56D.9040205@gentoo.org> References: <20060805021158.11ca6b15@c1358217.kevquinn.com> <44D3E56D.9040205@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.3.0 (GTK+ 2.8.19; i686-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_Y+_ri58oMFZHn/7yO=1I_oO"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: fccb1eea-1925-401d-80fe-53968a3cf3ca X-Archives-Hash: 11997b3b531a06e7ff4edc7b3d39e789 --Sig_Y+_ri58oMFZHn/7yO=1I_oO Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, 04 Aug 2006 17:25:17 -0700 Joshua Jackson wrote: > While I agree that it would be nice to see more > people using test and collision-protect I don't think its something we > should enable at this point in time till we have many packages working > correctly with the feature. It's a bit chicken-and-egg. While they're not default, they are a low priority to be fixed. However that said, I've been running with FEATURES=3Dtest (and collision-protect) pretty much since I joined (certainly all the time I've been a dev) and it doesn't cause a crippling amount of trouble - mainly because most packages do not include a test suite. > If however people feel that by enabling > it, that it'll make us actually fix these issues then I'd like to see > it move forward. That's my main motivation for suggesting it. I think packages should not be unmasked until they pass their test phase for the maintainer. They shouldn't go stable until they pass their test phase for the arch testers. > I'm just curious as to why this has come up suddenly Kevin? Well, it's not sudden for me - I've been thinking it should be the default for a long time, usually every time see a test failure that should have been caught by the maintainer and raise a bug for it. Have to raise the issue some time; there's no particular reason for raising it now, and there's certainly no hurry to change anything. A good time to do it would be when portage goes up a revision (to 2.2, or perhaps even when it goes to 2.1.1 if we think it won't be too disruptive). > p.s I hope all dev's run with test and collision-protect, I know I > know you don't but I can hope. IMO devs should be working with "collision-protect sandbox strict stricter test userpriv" but let's not get too excited ;) --=20 Kevin F. Quinn --Sig_Y+_ri58oMFZHn/7yO=1I_oO Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFE1GX09G2S8dekcG0RAhgYAJ9fgxcQ0GX3nbf/gyv9iggjjvvFEACg3+fc vgvcWIsO/FAlJTHq887e+Jo= =c6vz -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_Y+_ri58oMFZHn/7yO=1I_oO-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list