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 6EBAE138BF3 for ; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 08:06:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E2757E0B30; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 08:06:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from albert.telenet-ops.be (albert.telenet-ops.be [195.130.137.90]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D1CF5E0ABE for ; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 08:06:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from TOMWIJ-GENTOO ([94.226.55.127]) by albert.telenet-ops.be with bizsmtp id Sw651n00J2khLEN06w65Q3; Sun, 16 Feb 2014 09:06:06 +0100 Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2014 09:05:57 +0100 From: Tom Wijsman To: williamh@gentoo.org Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: Assigning keyword/stable bugs to arch teams (WAS: [gentoo-dev] dropping redundant stable keywords) Message-ID: <20140216090557.4f50affe@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> In-Reply-To: <20140216010556.GA2055@laptop.home> References: <20140203062524.GA7467@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> <20140203104341.2add2760@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20140204210319.GA1935@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> <20140205010833.1bcf8dca@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20140213212818.GA2199@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> <20140214195958.5aea85f0@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20140215012855.417f1caa@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> <20140215114157.6abe3da5@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20140215225322.GB1593@laptop.home> <20140216003703.6ceb9116@marga.jer-c2.orkz.net> <20140216010556.GA2055@laptop.home> 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_/uE1=qiHH4pHFmQ6fv869hoV"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: a1127bd6-417b-4b42-9e7b-d25c8d39ab21 X-Archives-Hash: 5ad435b8785dc6e5952f544475b56d03 --Sig_/uE1=qiHH4pHFmQ6fv869hoV Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 19:05:56 -0600 William Hubbs wrote: > On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 12:37:03AM +0100, Jeroen Roovers wrote: > > On Sat, 15 Feb 2014 16:53:22 -0600 > > William Hubbs wrote: > >=20 > > > The problem with this is, what if it is more than one arch team? > > > Which one do you assign it to? > >=20 > > Oh the fun we had in the past when bugs got assigned to one arch > > team with a few others CC'd and no maintainer in sight (because > > maybe the maintainer was the reporter, or was blanky assumed to be > > known). Or when another arch alias got CC'd later on. Or when a > > maintainer got fed up waiting and reassigned to an arch team in a > > "rage quit". And so on. It makes very messy bug reports. Musical > > chairs, anyone? > >=20 > > > If we want a separate assignee for old stabilizations, what about > > > a separate project that handles this, or maybe we could assign > > > the bugs to m-n or something until the arch teams catch up? > >=20 > > Again, where is the man power for that? :-) >=20 > Agreed, I was just trying to find a middle ground to satisfy the other > side of this. You've already did that with the very first post of your thread; this question however can be interpreted as either the given or the problem, I'd prefer the former as the latter would make this thread something that wouldn't have taken place. > > It's the maintainers that this problem hurts most, so they could and > > should be fixing it themselves - after a few months of waiting, > > reminding arch teams and gritting your teeth over it, just remove > > the old stable ebuilds[1]. >=20 > Agreed, all the way. this is a real problem for package maintainers > when arch teams are so understaffed they can't keep up. >=20 > Also, it does a disservice to our users for us to claim we have stable > trees on these arches when the stable packages are multiple versions > behind the maintainer's stable requests. +1, on top of that it is further behind what upstream considers stable; alongside that comes the drop in upstream support and bug filing, as the old version could be considered unsupported by upstream. --=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_/uE1=qiHH4pHFmQ6fv869hoV Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJTAHFlAAoJEPWZc8roOL/Qmn8H/3tM4iGXntBiOn/Im7BtQZzl fMu1WSFM5288qxNpguo7K5Hgj1MVksA2qZ7tUc/2MnZow2Zk4mfYRKxNUo08Fda+ BM63FGrAj6R+TijFznnf5YI2XpUczL+FE6JaWxqEGia1GW+DUwnB4Yy28rJtayYF UkiflNAzMbFe6sW8SL0byMu4Nlcs3cr91E4s9L3ggYFRUgAJOT0zNUqRX7ubYwlQ zd3pzJ21ItRzyAPtoX8fUYK3rixTVT5H80i02Z6xVOG2MxGLSA2w/j+DhaS2Yq5I UkRcRt2gV7U09TT1LiNugkInV4PaWPBlA8lvVXaxgCJltq9HhLmiHbQnGDAKBuQ= =EWo7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/uE1=qiHH4pHFmQ6fv869hoV--