From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84BFE138247 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 00:39:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2739CE0A04; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 00:39:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from juliette.telenet-ops.be (juliette.telenet-ops.be [195.130.137.74]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id ECED7E09F2 for ; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 00:39:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TOMWIJ-GENTOO ([94.226.55.127]) by juliette.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id E0f41n00B2khLEN060f4f6; Wed, 15 Jan 2014 01:39:04 +0100 Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 01:38:08 +0100 From: Tom Wijsman To: dilfridge@gentoo.org Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy Message-ID: <20140115013808.42d4fb5f@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: <201401150106.20742.dilfridge@gentoo.org> References: <20140114213719.GA2684@laptop.home> <20140115004928.1fae6bf9@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <201401150106.20742.dilfridge@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.22; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/aVsu7ux5sf5LTAL8JXxqBfq"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 684db939-5655-4b97-b96c-86b73d7b9999 X-Archives-Hash: 02b72431c3954db980108bf66b25ded1 --Sig_/aVsu7ux5sf5LTAL8JXxqBfq Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 15 Jan 2014 01:06:07 +0100 "Andreas K. Huettel" wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 15. Januar 2014, 00:49:28 schrieb Tom Wijsman: > > On Tue, 14 Jan 2014 15:37:19 -0600 > >=20 > > William Hubbs wrote: > > > Thoughts? > >=20 > > In this situation, I see three opposite ends of choices: > >=20 >=20 > Here's another idea:=20 >=20 > 4. Friendly ask the arch teams / make a policy that @system packages > come first.=20 Hmm, I'm wondering if that has an actual use or whether that would just move the problem. The bug in question that WilliamH demonstrated is indeed part of @system; but shouldn't be, it is due to functions.sh. So, assuming OpenRC wouldn't have been part of it, as it should be; this suggestion wouldn't change WilliamH's problem. Then comes the question whether we expand on all options in the virtuals, dependencies that come in through certain USE flags of @system; as well as the important libraries that aren't necessarily part of @system. Though on the other hand, what would be the point of prioritizing stabilization of important libraries if the applications are way too long detailed? Maybe it could improve their workflow of picking bugs a bit, dunno; I guess arch teams can shed some light on this last part. > (maybe these stable requests could be marked "major" in bugzilla > then?) Given that I think that we want more than just @system in the future, but those other things wouldn't be as important as @system and thus need a different way of being marked; I think we should rather pick "blocker" for @system packages. Then it still leaves us "critical" and "major" available for packages that are in between being the most and least important. Though as said, I think this would make only certain people happy; the question is to whereas how unhappy the other people would be, I can't really comment on this because of completely using unstable here. --=20 With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : TomWij@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D --Sig_/aVsu7ux5sf5LTAL8JXxqBfq Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS1dhwAAoJEJWyH81tNOV9lmQH/iGXsRAtdk5oYjqYisCD0bRh 4Ux5tmgKNFOji6a3itAGWUOkPGcZM1UridZ0IBi3i1VIzOFX7Zb6soPnuAnJubi4 hoBgrfN3Dv3T2PCUKtemhiLWwVz4Znfo2g/QrwoDdYiqnkqtQZsRHDxYiDOWFeA+ NxppVp4JFqdJkTW2jm0vo2lejq2rNqc+X2T0dPU6tno5cAwgwc4immjrfTnkEJrX JYfrIPxHCUzk+l2jXCQbsKg6Lw0Owrjdxk25iqTSdiTdW2HJKBqKvTfdqGVWQVMW 7Mv+afKTMfj5QwpX91iB3BIHmnOCaPrYIIQCYnylzPF/pjsmEslIuUZ9jirpopY= =G1fM -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/aVsu7ux5sf5LTAL8JXxqBfq--