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 ) id 1RbVeZ-0006NX-FV for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:08:39 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 74FF721C0EA; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:08:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-iy0-f181.google.com (mail-iy0-f181.google.com [209.85.210.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7473E011E for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:07:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: by iakk12 with SMTP id k12so2946090iak.40 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 03:07:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=oIRsud+mCIq014gNXCqIC3WfwKPO8O9w1xBVlVFyTYQ=; b=E9hZuVmc15UBfUmP5ngFhb90KY6KayxW6mtEUx7LrckgRgcNqSL/UfLQpgzBC7xzqu LOkh9SzPVA00f/usYvwYhRHQLdh0vUS6jlQjQ5QF9xTaEKgbvukUeXYOdwbkDvaPdVY+ cHMGGxEd0wK0rWBaVyZYKp0cPVOKyUsNOFmH0= Received: by 10.50.208.72 with SMTP id mc8mr7973863igc.19.1324033667302; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 03:07:47 -0800 (PST) Received: from smtp.gmail.com:587 (74-95-192-101-SFBA.hfc.comcastbusiness.net. [74.95.192.101]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id i2sm2162840igq.7.2011.12.16.03.07.45 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 16 Dec 2011 03:07:46 -0800 (PST) Received: by smtp.gmail.com:587 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 16 Dec 2011 03:07:46 -0800 Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 03:07:46 -0800 From: Brian Harring To: justin Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] making the stable tree more up-to-date Message-ID: <20111216110746.GA5571@localhost.hobnob.com> References: <4ECA0EA3.8020407@gentoo.org> <4EEB2087.2050608@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: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4EEB2087.2050608@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: 743f6246-9c0c-4f66-9dc4-13d97e05eeb1 X-Archives-Hash: 6b970bc4c306336beb68045ac2a2b89e On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 11:42:15AM +0100, justin wrote: > Hi, > > I really like that you open all those bugs. But it makes no sense to add > arches after a "time out". At least not after a such a short one. The > maintainer is responsible for the package, that means it is their > responsibility to decide that a package should go stable. Might want to include data on "short time out". If said timeout also occured despite a dev being away, that also would be relevant. Personally, having been on the receiving end of it I don't mind it- the timeout approach is good for getting procrastrinating and/or overloaded maintaners to speak up rather than the bug rotting. > In addition > they have to make the package fit to the standards that the arch teams > request. And I can tell from my own experience it is always more than > the average package has. Eh? Tree standards apply, if the ebuild isn't yet to that point, than it should be sorted prior to unstable /anyways/. If an arch has special standards, and they want the pkg stabled, it's on the *arch* to do the legwork if the requirements are daft, else tell the arch to be less retarded. My view at least. I *suspect* the requirements you're complaining about here are more related to source quality/running on alternate arches rather than packaging itself- either way clarification is useful. > So as long as you don't review the packages > yourself, consider a different proceeding than this timeout. > > Please remove all added arches from the packages maintained by all sci* > teams. I have no issues w/ people bypassing me if I'm not doing my job in a timely fashion- with the caveat that anyone doing so has to keep what they kill (you break it, you fix it; if I'm overloaded someone making a mess and dumping it in my lap will result in a fair bit of hell directed their way). ~harring