public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Cc: rich0@gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree
Date: Mon, 15 Aug 2016 14:12:48 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160815191248.GA21981@whubbs1.gaikai.biz> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGfcS_m+1csrVHAK8TOgLCeXGaFSZUrpVFErfmMYw9kAa9gJFw@mail.gmail.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1826 bytes --]

On Mon, Aug 15, 2016 at 02:33:52PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> I'm fine with maintainers de-keywording packages on their own
> initiative.  However, if a maintainer hasn't even built a package on
> an arch, they shouldn't be stabilizing it on that arch.  That would
> make the concept of stable meaningless.  If it is just ~arch plus a
> time delay, then we should just get rid of the stable keywords and
> instead have portage just filter packages by the date they were
> committed to ~arch.
 
 ok, this makes sense.

> I'd rather see maintainers just yank the last stable package and break
> the depgraph and let the arch teams deal with the cleanup than have
> them mark stuff stable without any testing at all.  Or build a script
> that does the keyword cleanup for them.  De-keywording late stable
> requests is a solution that is self-correcting.  As packages are
> reduced from the stable set then there are fewer stable requests and
> the arch team is better able to focus on the ones they deem important.
> Throwing more packages in stable that aren't actually stable just
> makes that problem worse, and destroys whatever value the stable
> keyword had on the arch.  For small arch teams they really should be
> focusing their time on core packages.

Rich, This was my original thinking about this issue. It turned out to
be more controversial than I originally thought -- folks told me that
stable tree users expect stability above all, so breaking the depgraph
is unacceptable, so I'm just trying to find something that is more
palletable.

I have a few bugs right now where I haven't done this because I know it
is going to require "repoman commit --force" to work, and set of our ci
alarms etc. Should I not care about that and just let the arch teams
clean it up?

William


[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 181 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2016-08-15 19:13 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 60+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2016-08-14 21:35 [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree Kristian Fiskerstrand
2016-08-14 21:45 ` Ciaran McCreesh
2016-08-14 21:49   ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2016-08-14 21:49   ` Kent Fredric
2016-08-14 21:52     ` M. J. Everitt
2016-08-14 22:06     ` Chris Reffett
2016-08-14 21:50   ` Anthony G. Basile
2016-08-14 21:57     ` Ciaran McCreesh
2016-08-14 22:01       ` Kent Fredric
2016-08-15 19:18       ` Andreas K. Hüttel
2016-08-15 19:19         ` Michael Orlitzky
2016-08-15  3:45 ` Jason Zaman
2016-08-15  3:53   ` Kent Fredric
2016-08-15  4:05     ` Jason Zaman
2016-08-15  7:55       ` Brian Dolbec
2016-08-15  8:50         ` Kent Fredric
2016-08-15 10:21         ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2016-08-18  6:33           ` Daniel Campbell
2016-08-15 13:40         ` Rich Freeman
2016-08-15 15:48           ` Brian Dolbec
2016-08-15  4:29 ` #wg-stable: Reservations about a "STABLE" & "NeedsStable" bugzilla keywords (re: [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree) Kent Fredric
2016-08-15  4:37   ` Kent Fredric
2016-08-15 12:22     ` james
2016-08-15 12:49   ` Dirkjan Ochtman
2016-08-15 13:03     ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2016-08-15 13:15       ` Dirkjan Ochtman
2016-08-15 13:25         ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2016-08-15 14:28           ` james
2016-08-15 18:24           ` Dirkjan Ochtman
2016-08-15 19:30       ` Andreas K. Hüttel
2016-08-15 19:42         ` Rich Freeman
2016-08-21  0:30           ` Daniel Campbell
2016-10-04 17:25             ` Ian Stakenvicius
2016-10-07  2:40               ` Daniel Campbell
2016-08-15 23:00         ` Kent Fredric
2016-08-15 22:50       ` Kent Fredric
2016-08-15  8:00 ` [gentoo-dev] New Working Group established to evaluate the stable tree Pacho Ramos
2016-08-15  8:15   ` Pacho Ramos
2016-08-15 14:19   ` William Hubbs
2016-08-15 14:49     ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2016-08-15 14:50       ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2016-08-15 16:12         ` William Hubbs
2016-08-15 17:31           ` William Hubbs
2016-08-15 18:33             ` Rich Freeman
2016-08-15 19:12               ` William Hubbs [this message]
2016-08-15 19:27                 ` Rich Freeman
2016-08-15 20:01                   ` William Hubbs
2016-08-15 20:05                     ` Rich Freeman
2016-08-16  8:02                     ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2016-08-16 13:52                       ` William Hubbs
2016-08-17  8:52                     ` [gentoo-dev] " Pacho Ramos
2016-08-17  8:50                   ` Pacho Ramos
2016-08-17 13:07                     ` Rich Freeman
2016-08-17 14:25                       ` Pacho Ramos
2016-08-18  7:32                     ` Raymond Jennings
2016-08-15 11:36 ` Kristian Fiskerstrand
2016-08-15 12:24 ` Michael Orlitzky
2016-08-15 13:37   ` Rich Freeman
2016-08-15 23:19     ` Kent Fredric
2016-08-15 19:33 ` Markus Meier

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20160815191248.GA21981@whubbs1.gaikai.biz \
    --to=williamh@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
    --cc=rich0@gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox