From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([69.77.167.62] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JCqzv-0004YK-K0 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 06:34:39 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CEE3DE0505; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 06:34:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 87543E0505 for ; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 06:34:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58B9964E32; Thu, 10 Jan 2008 06:34:36 +0000 (UTC) From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Of Mips and Devs [Was: Monthly Gentoo Council Reminder for January] Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 01:34:34 -0500 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.7 Cc: Kumba References: <20080101103002.083C4652C4@smtp.gentoo.org> <47858CAF.8040907@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <47858CAF.8040907@gentoo.org> 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-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1543472.EKN8CdxlAQ"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200801100134.35669.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 287e28ac-cbe6-4abd-8794-77ca7698681e X-Archives-Hash: ed331394fe60af0a01429780f47931da --nextPart1543472.EKN8CdxlAQ Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Wednesday 09 January 2008, Kumba wrote: > Well, I guess it's something that's been needing to be faced for some time > now, as difficult as it is to do. Regardless of the accusations and > counter-accusations flying around in this thread, I'll just go ahead and > state the fact that yes, we are a "slacker arch". > > Why? Because there's just no time anymore these days and no one left > really of the original team. And a lot of that really is my fault. Tuxus > may have laid the first keel of our ship, but I was the one who, so long > ago, made her seaworthy and crewed her. But now, she's largely a ghost > ship -- adrift in the seas, and a hazard to the other ships. thanks ... you've always been a straight shooter without any bs mixed in. > 1. It's been suggested that mips drop all stable keywords ('mips') leaving > unstable keywords as-is ('~mips'). > > That said, however, I don't think it would be appropriate to commit a pat= ch > to portage that wipes out all our stable keywords in one go. I think it > would be more appropriate to phase such a change in gently, because as far > as I know, no one else has really done this. The other archs typically > maintain a stable/unstable set of keywords in the tree. So I think this > should be managed by the profiles. I've been needing to do some profile > cleanup anyways, so I can probably fiddle with a 2008.0-dev profile set to > only do ~arch, and then see how that goes. that certainly sounds reasonable to me. if the stable cant be maintained, = let=20 the common workflow of developers transition it back to ~arch until someone= =20 has the time to keep arch usable. changing profiles.desc accordingly shoul= d=20 be done ahead of time. perhaps a new category for profiles.desc ? "exp" f= or=20 such ports ? i could see all *-fbsd ports being moved there. tweak repoma= n=20 to be less verbose about dep issues for such profiles and we're set. > 3. Should Gentoo even continue to support mips? i see dropping keywords as a very last resort. getting a port *back* into = the=20 tree is a *tremendous* amount of work (i went through it and it was hell),= =20 while keeping ~arch alive is a sliver of effort and generally not a blocker= =20 for package maintainers. > Do people even *use* mips?=20 mips certainly sees use on the embedded side. there should be no doubt=20 whatsoever about its usage. =2Dmike --nextPart1543472.EKN8CdxlAQ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.8 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJHhbx7AAoJEEFjO5/oN/WBGXUP/j4BjPlazTlmrg+ipvu2gPFQ HkyybK6ORrX5xSy5gWZY3zn1xKJN9lgowN/SQ7RFFdDEgJJAjvptefe96ogp4epk mojSm1uJAQKGYOtECzXMkgfxN5sZf7GK6qFOpdoPZTHp3yWQPmQVwGGtIg3SJotO mgTxEBa0rajlvkTWiTnL+mlYqkjJrk9a06TJ78zI5lxI55plzrtQA+WexrZ0cVg9 PWdujmrwBWr1f58+ULIg2rnffw15aRbMlRX4vh9laNaituFC9SNOcoGfo12IkHYz /BzZ6m3peW1hrMllfZcgrdEC7idv9t/K1qhXNOITlAxNQDzaXkkhKGnSFVkprN48 5g1v3wVKxBHfRM8wvCGucsgPu0QYrVbxSPkLcwQj7NKRUgZzY3dVuQUY3BWYaqG9 9SnI5XsPh4RqVnFXIwgtYDKSOaZ9FKB1BwI92TcNCIds9Tww8ei/nM7RkPXTbtGh t7IOMmz59eZI4WAiJg+H0kiqSeD/sVbGXnudDeClCmQ7wBypIsL+n5oSartWzDz8 Me94v10ZqwTUphg/08rxZyWF0B+LpAWbLepYq8r0LU0TUOKILomANLynVf5yEKMb x7atxCN4SjCUaFgMtIXmUhngYkJMN4JRsInyccbBF9ANq7mmNTOp0Yk1Fehx4HMT rXmcVRemk8leCYigfJbS =8Yig -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1543472.EKN8CdxlAQ-- -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list