From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-64560-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org> Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8295A13827E for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 17:27:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 8BA0DE0B52; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 17:27:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from albert.telenet-ops.be (albert.telenet-ops.be [195.130.137.90]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7BE7CE0AE6 for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 17:27:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TOMWIJ-GENTOO ([94.226.55.127]) by albert.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id HtTR1n00H2khLEN06tTRtw; Fri, 24 Jan 2014 18:27:25 +0100 Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 18:26:07 +0100 From: Tom Wijsman <TomWij@gentoo.org> To: steev@gentoo.org Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: revisiting our stabilization policy Message-ID: <20140124182607.52b3c52c@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: <1390535567.3909.12.camel@oswin.hackershack.net> References: <52D5F0BF.3060305@gentoo.org> <20140115024604.GA3952@laptop.home> <20140115232804.1c26beda@kruskal.home.chead.ca> <20140116234442.27c361d1@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20140119143157.72fc0e91@kruskal.home.chead.ca> <20140120014713.2cafc257@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20140123181242.GA17827@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> <20140123201333.71e52bfc@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <1390510534.14914.22.camel@oswin.hackershack.net> <20140123233806.4709abd5@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20140123224228.1780.qmail@stuge.se> <20140124005040.350249c9@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <1390521859.3909.3.camel@oswin.hackershack.net> <20140124040444.058bd7a7@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <1390535567.3909.12.camel@oswin.hackershack.net> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.9.0 (GTK+ 2.24.22; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/X+n9uzFkgmYEeLMxiT=xUR/"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: 32a966ae-8acc-4770-be6c-186f19a9fa39 X-Archives-Hash: 2ad8ab7f5dbad5e269e033ce431a9c1d --Sig_/X+n9uzFkgmYEeLMxiT=xUR/ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 21:52:47 -0600 Steev Klimaszewski <steev@gentoo.org> wrote: > The idea moves the work around, it doesn't lessen the workload at all. It is an idea to solve your actual problem, which isn't workload. > You can easily find 7 people who have an armv7, and even v6, since the > rpi is quite popular. They are easier to find than someone that has everything. > Getting them into the arch team and willing to run stable and > actually test programs is a whole other story, which lead to you > saying: >=20 > "People that have certain architectures can just add themselves, no > extra work again." Which is for people already on the arm arch; consider the context you quote this from, rather than assuming what is not explicitly stated. > What you've thrown out as a possible solution is akin to taking a pile > of peas on the plate and moving them around the plate so that the pile > doesn't look so big. =20 In other words, using separation to organize them properly. > It doesn't change the amount of work, but you do need to look in more > places for the work. Which you can collect back into one place. > Finding people with the hardware is the main issue, and I think I > mentioned before, some people are simply unwilling to invest in > "slow" hardware, so we have to rely on the people who DO have it. > And if that means things take longer to stable, well, why is that an > issue? Stable is supposed to be that - stable. =20 That is because you only look for people that have all the hardware. > > > if you aren't willing to put in the work, don't expect others to. > >=20 > > If you are unwilling to work towards solutions, don't expect others > > to. > >=20 > > > And yes, I see what you mean now re: my reply seeming off - it > > > would seem when I hit group reply, for some reason, Evolution is > > > putting Peter Stuge into the CC, and not Tom Wijsman (despite > > > hitting group reply from your email. Maybe there should have > > > been more testing of Gnome 3.8 before it was stabled on x86... > >=20 > > http://www.unicom.com/pw/reply-to-harmful.html > > http://woozle.org/~neale/papers/reply-to-still-harmful.html > >=20 >=20 > I don't care of "reply to" is considered harmful, It however caused problems with your e-mail. > I care that > something that worked with the previous stable is suddenly not > working with the new stable. It obviously shows that it wasn't > tested properly, and yet was marked stable. Which is your actual problem that we are trying to solve here. > So, as QA, shouldn't you be doing something about that, rather than > pointing to some URLs on the web, telling me I'm in the wrong for > using the option that is supposed to handle that properly in my > stable software? The problem lies in a different place than the software itself. --=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_/X+n9uzFkgmYEeLMxiT=xUR/ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJS4qIzAAoJEJWyH81tNOV9ERUIAKtzdp0E1xwayaEpP+q9qYoy wRWaK65yza/slfN2/YyBWDSYGK2mGjXUDSyYYed9V2Gub6qc8GWHisqkNjL+VOum KWa3+42sR9WLxvXJ70v77PoXlVM93sHcIT/j9gSTpRKOEF5pt+iAWGToY6k+pSXU yFBvuYM7Dh4/2SHIRbhvzFj4e9mObDgj5KJHH9OOvelTgqvSqDE55BzUBhAQUAaC GQDjH/sAcbGKGWJXTvfomOPZ8Mx/svD63agnmK2C6TjcASkj7JhRbWxSeeqrbi3f vZmNLVkwbuReIkntM0iQVqB9/eebWQwHHwvdi9uhO5RtJallWbQELC7Uw4WQI1A= =U26p -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/X+n9uzFkgmYEeLMxiT=xUR/--