From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org)
by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
(envelope-from <gentoo-dev+bounces-40278-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1NvuFY-0001Tn-9l
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 15:18:04 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 01C6CE0901;
Sun, 28 Mar 2010 15:18:01 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com (fg-out-1718.google.com [72.14.220.158])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A63DE08EC
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 15:17:53 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id l26so513893fgb.10
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 28 Mar 2010 08:17:52 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date
:user-agent:references:in-reply-to:disposition-notification-to
:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:message-id;
bh=ApcmlxXf0ApFL/w1UdhmogBTnwNNee8HFdEze7z69sY=;
b=Ganndbz02HI9ZkRduSOleWJiphiB2+CtWE3gz4XHRDmVRUQT6nT3cMB7Qh7jyFgg/A
FankX27zGsWyDdBWJ42vO/vJ42Hj3bDD/jGQ2j6HDa7SxYnqogRJe4/XlNEAHtJ60pox
rk8oXMErMqhgCQlAkUC84DHThauH/noa3g+Pw=
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:references:in-reply-to
:disposition-notification-to:mime-version:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding:message-id;
b=pxNbltzn2r3M+ln6Y+Q/MA0NaBdyMnorEF+AURec5EQXrmbFHcZ38gN2gTBUSeHhY5
RWyTJXdxYT6/RtQ08/lmUmM+eV/hAQ8LOfaOdswpCORVkDlVinwF5WvciZMY3/boezmm
lHQ3mBIu3F+a4aZkMTaMUg4fITDCciA2z7wm8=
Received: by 10.87.42.2 with SMTP id u2mr3664471fgj.79.1269789472764;
Sun, 28 Mar 2010 08:17:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from lebrodyl.localnet (aehb181.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl [79.186.183.181])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 14sm2267902fxm.9.2010.03.28.08.17.51
(version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5);
Sun, 28 Mar 2010 08:17:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: Maciej Mrozowski <reavertm@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Reworking package stabilization policies
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2010 17:18:03 +0200
User-Agent: KMail/1.13.2 (Linux/2.6.31-gentoo-r10; KDE/4.4.2; x86_64; ; )
References: <20100327205841.GA12996@linux1> <201003280747.28790.reavertm@gmail.com> <20100328083918.48f5835b@snowmobile>
In-Reply-To: <20100328083918.48f5835b@snowmobile>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <201003281718.03935.reavertm@gmail.com>
X-Archives-Salt: 7fc656e0-ec21-498d-840d-a4dce7d9a518
X-Archives-Hash: 5d6097d52ec48ef2543078b54cc9903b
On Sunday 28 of March 2010 09:39:18 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > It's really freaking silly to wait months for stabilization of some
> > random php/perl library that's known to work.
> How do you know it works if you don't test on the arch in question?
The problem is not waiting for some <instert some exotic arch here> to go
stable so it would be possible to close bug and ignore arches.
It's not about closing bug at all.
The only inconvenience from exotic arches lagging is inability to remove
particular old ebuild from tree, that's it.
It's about having package marked stabled on my arch (amd64 in my case, may be
other from other developer's perspective) in a timely manner.
And I know it works on my arch because I test it and often use it on daily
basis.
On Sunday 28 of March 2010 13:32:59 Richard Freeman wrote:
> amd64 has had the policy that any dev can stabilize if they've tested it
> on a stable amd64 system, and this hasn't really caused problems.
That would have certainly solved the problem if that policy was written and
published anywhere.
--
regards
MM