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 CA8A213877A for ; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 15:37:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 475BFE0B58; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 15:37:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2E371E0AFA for ; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 15:37:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pomiot.lan (77-255-6-176.adsl.inetia.pl [77.255.6.176]) (using SSLv3 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: mgorny) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3F30134013A; Mon, 30 Jun 2014 15:37:06 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2014 17:36:54 +0200 From: =?ISO-8859-2?B?TWljaGGzIEfzcm55?= To: Ian Stakenvicius Cc: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] package.mask vs ~arch Message-ID: <20140630173654.0c70c367@pomiot.lan> In-Reply-To: <53B1809F.9070807@gentoo.org> References: <20140630040153.GA668@linux1> <53B1809F.9070807@gentoo.org> Organization: Gentoo X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.10.1 (GTK+ 2.24.24; 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-sha512; boundary="Sig_/zvjdugYQS9sgz24p144kZQy"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: a4fde367-a2a2-439c-b6c1-b2ea5def57c3 X-Archives-Hash: d9881f52f6f63b9dea55755270586046 --Sig_/zvjdugYQS9sgz24p144kZQy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Dnia 2014-06-30, o godz. 11:22:07 Ian Stakenvicius napisa=B3(a): > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 >=20 > On 30/06/14 09:25 AM, Rich Freeman wrote: > > On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:01 AM, William Hubbs > > wrote: > >>=20 > >> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 10:04:54AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: > >>> On Sun, Jun 29, 2014 at 8:36 AM, hasufell > >>> wrote: > >>>> This is still too vague for me. If it's expected to be > >>>> short-term, then it can as well just land in ~arch. > >>>=20 > >>> A package that hasn't been tested AT ALL doesn't belong in > >>> ~arch. Suppose the maintainer is unable to test some aspect of > >>> the package, or any aspect of the package? Do we want it to > >>> break completely for ~arch? In that event, nobody will run > >>> ~arch for that package, and then it still isn't getting > >>> tested. > >>=20 > >> I'm not saying that we should just randomly throw something into > >> ~arch without testing it, but ~arch users are running ~arch with > >> the understanding that their systems will break from time to time > >> and they are expected to be able to deal with it when/if it > >> happens. ~arch is not a second stable branch. > >=20 > > Agree 100%. I'm taking about masking things that HAVEN'T BEEN > > TESTED AT ALL. The maintainer knows that they compile, and that is > > it. Or maybe they tested it in a very limited set of circumstances > > but know that other untested circumstances are important to the > > users and they have definite plans to get them tested. > >=20 >=20 >=20 > Here's a great example of this -- dev-libs/nss-3.16-r1 is p.masked by > me for testing, because when I converted it to multilib i needed to > change the way it does some internal ABI determination tests, and > although I know it does work fine on multilib-amd64 and (non-multilib) > x86, I am not confident without more testing that it will work for > cross-compiles or other non-multilib arches. As such, it -is- in the > tree, but I've masked it until I can test it myself in these > circumstances or find someone else that can do it for me. But... if you unmask it, someone will test it and report whether it works :P. --=20 Best regards, Micha=B3 G=F3rny --Sig_/zvjdugYQS9sgz24p144kZQy Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iQJ8BAEBCgBmBQJTsYQZXxSAAAAAAC4AKGlzc3Vlci1mcHJAbm90YXRpb25zLm9w ZW5wZ3AuZmlmdGhob3JzZW1hbi5uZXQ2REJCMDdDQzRGMERBRDA2RUEwQUZFNDFC MDdBMUFFQUVGQjQ0NjRFAAoJELB6GurvtEZOq94P+gJYWs8vx1+/Z/cJwkMfBAWO nBUtDhLZP6UXwMWjytLPP5Fiu+ALeghiAexZmKf+1/rhSNGN/ZgnlPyJTcVXEUOA bIQ2Yzc8I99eOGSKa30qJiXq+QWYoPpqJp0wRs0Ba18pLz2c+kCDUVzfLF/1deUX oJLTpT57tqxNKZnRIPFgauL0PB1AXQBblJefRZ/HDrFlbrGRFLGTPuNLuSIKHK2d +f2p5JndBWSb5JKZcmYKsnhJA8eI9HhFyKXIAmnLP5JgxF1Ryis5FybdITByUubE uBUEftCZjv5GLgEoL2ahCyOY9QMPLn68L9fTLxVEp58bLG0S7zL7Gfz3VgGlQ565 PSSWnCOGk/DhSal0FpLGjoZs8emyonKzeer6bEFdVpLdDDxWbXU7N+WlG6u+E6CO VprmQrM6u25ej7BQmmuykK5MyEwpY5wvJWAmegERnuxM44wBltWojQ9P86xOZd/F 20To0FN+2F8DsqF1D//k3rCFhi1nctvHxiH9V4yeU8zf5oBskmdkQGSRuTqBvyke 4eBSnXBHsWGo/M6eXR8+WVOlF3bFOGIjOQ9q1Ew1gLc1UMwyvVnoCpLZZDEyZ7Gh XTbgRd9K7BQJfrqjInOAsBCi2ab6/M2Gxd8RbASD5Hwzfi2mjMIS++bxeXOnEcC3 URW02mYURSeFCoB3uutq =M4Zx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/zvjdugYQS9sgz24p144kZQy--