From: William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Cc: qa@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] QA: package.mask policies
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 2009 12:03:22 -0600 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091107180322.GA23301@linux1> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200911071824.16651.scarabeus@gentoo.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2381 bytes --]
Hi all,
I'm not QA, but I'll go ahead and add my comments to this also.
On Sat, Nov 07, 2009 at 06:24:10PM +0100, Tom???? Chv??tal wrote:
> * Masking beta...
> This masks are good if the software release is KNOWN to break previous
> behaviour or degrade user experience. Otherwise the software should not be
> masked (its TESTING for purpose, not stable).
Agreed. If it works and does not cause issues for users or degrade
their experience, it should be in ~arch, not in p.mask.
> Also the maintainer should watch if the testing branch is still relevant (why
> on earth we have masked 4.0.3_p20070403 version of screen when newer 4.3 is
> stable ;]) and remove the branch+mask when needed.
Definitely. If a newer version of a package is stable, or in
~arch for that matter, why do we still have the old version in the tree
and masked while the newer version is unmasked?
> * Masking live...
> Heck no. This is not proper usage. Just use keywords mask. KEYWORDS="".
> Problem solved and the package.mask is smaller. (Note, in overlays do what
> ever you want, since it does not polute the main mask from g-x86).
True. If we mask live ebuilds with KEYWORDS="", there isn't a reason
to put them in p.mask that I can think of.
> * Masking stable releases...
> Here i found most interesting stuff around (for example mask for testing from
> 2006, yeah not ~ material after 3 years?! :P)
> There should be policy defined that you can add the new release under p.mask if
> you see it fit, but the mask can stay only for 6 months (less/more,
> suggestions?) and then it must be unmasked, or have really high activity on
> tracker bug and good reasoning (mask for ruby-1.9 and so on).
Off the top of my head, I think this falls under category 1 above as
well. If a new release of a package and everything that uses the new
package can be installed in a way that does not degrade the user's
experience if they want to use the older release, it doesn't need to be
in p.mask. In general, I don't think a new release of a package should
be added to p.mask unless it fits category 1 above.
Things that have been "masked for testing" for years need to have
a decision made about them -- keep them in the tree and unmask them or
remove them.
--
William Hubbs
gentoo accessibility team lead
williamh@gentoo.org
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-11-07 18:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-11-07 17:24 [gentoo-dev] QA: package.mask policies Tomáš Chvátal
2009-11-07 18:03 ` William Hubbs [this message]
2009-11-07 18:33 ` [gentoo-dev] " Christian Faulhammer
2009-11-07 18:56 ` William Hubbs
2009-11-07 19:03 ` Duncan
2009-11-08 0:08 ` Nirbheek Chauhan
2009-11-08 1:25 ` Duncan
2009-11-08 23:46 ` Vlastimil Babka
2009-11-08 1:26 ` Kent Fredric
2009-11-08 15:13 ` Christian Faulhammer
2009-11-09 13:17 ` Duncan
2009-11-08 12:41 ` [gentoo-dev] " Peter Volkov
2009-11-08 16:57 ` Jeroen Roovers
2009-11-08 17:20 ` Tomáš Chvátal
2009-11-11 16:43 ` Jeroen Roovers
2009-11-11 17:11 ` [gentoo-dev] " Torsten Veller
2009-11-11 21:54 ` Jeroen Roovers
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20091107180322.GA23301@linux1 \
--to=williamh@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
--cc=qa@gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox