public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
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 --]

  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