Re: [gentoo-dev] Developers, please work on underlinking issues!

[Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org>]

On Fri, 19 Aug 2016 06:58:44 +0200
Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 15:21:16 +0200
> Alexis Ballier <aballier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Thu, 18 Aug 2016 08:13:14 -0400
> > Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >   
> > > If you just check your packages occassionally to make sure they
> > > build with gold it completely achieves the goal, and it will
> > > actually result in fewer bugs using the non-gold linker as
> > > well.    
> > 
> > That's what a tinderbox is for. The only QA problem I see here is
> > that QA doesn't automate that kind of checks anymore since Diego
> > left. Maybe QA should ask Toralf to run a ld.gold tinderbox and
> > avoid asking people to randomly test random packages ?  
> 
> Yes, tinderboxing makes a lot of sense if the bugs are afterwards
> ignored by package maintainers.

"ignored" is rather strong here; considering people join gentoo and
basically work for free, I'd rather say "not considered important
enough" which yields basically the same result but without accusing
people of refusing to fix a bug. With that in mind, everybody is free
to submit patches to bugzie, and if it is a QA goal, QA is free to
apply it after some time. Nothing is blocked here, expect when people
prefer to hit fellow developers "with a cluebat" rather than getting
things done.

> Or in the best case, the maintainer
> tells reporter (Toralf) to file the bug upstream.

It's not because Toralf reported it that he is the only one that has
the right to report it upstream. Obtaining fixes from those that know
the package best is good, isn't it ? I thought we learned from the past
and tried to avoid, e.g., fixing valgrind warnings in libssl by our
own :)

Alexis.