[gentoo-dev] getting sus-2.0.1 marked stable

[gentoo-dev] getting sus-2.0.1 marked stable

[William Hubbs]

Hi all,

I'm not sure if this question should go here or to gentoo-user, so if it should go there let me know and I'll refer it there.

I submitted an ebuild for sus-2.0.1, a program similar to sudo, a few weeks ago.  It was added to the tree and marked testing.  I have been using it and had not problems with it.

What is the procedure for getting it marked stable?

Thanks a lot,

William


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] getting sus-2.0.1 marked stable

[Kumba]

William Hubbs wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I'm not sure if this question should go here or to gentoo-user, so if it should go there let me know and I'll refer it there.
> 
> I submitted an ebuild for sus-2.0.1, a program similar to sudo, a few weeks ago.  It was added to the tree and marked testing.  I have been using it and had not problems with it.
> 
> What is the procedure for getting it marked stable?
> 
> Thanks a lot,
> 
> William

Usually you file another bug in that case.  While not technically a 
"bug" bug, it still lets us keep track of those kind of needed updates.

--Kumba

-- 
"Such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: 
small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are 
elsewhere."  --Elrond


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] getting sus-2.0.1 marked stable

[Svyatogor]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 955 bytes --]

On Fri, 1 Aug 2003 12:57:19 -0500
William Hubbs <kc5eiv@kc5eiv.homeip.net> wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> I'm not sure if this question should go here or to gentoo-user, so if it should go there let me know and I'll refer it there.
> 
> I submitted an ebuild for sus-2.0.1, a program similar to sudo, a few weeks ago.  It was added to the tree and marked testing.  I have been using it and had not problems with it.
> 
> What is the procedure for getting it marked stable?

Usually we mark ebuilds stable after they've been in portage for a month with no bugs reported. So it would make sense if before filing bug with request to make it stable, you check if there are any open bugs for it. If there isn't, then (generally) there shouldn't be any problem with changing ~ARCH to ARCH. Everything else is up to the maintainer of the package.

-- 
Let the Force be with us!
Sergey Kuleshov <svyatogor@gentoo.org>
Public Key: http://dev.gentoo.org/~sergey/gentoo-gpg

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] getting sus-2.0.1 marked stable

[George Shapovalov]

I prefer getting test reports added to the same bug, - this is why we got 
RESOLVED/TEST_REQUEST after all! (the bug is already "invisible" in normal 
mode, but easily searchable - by "Assigned To" and its status, quite handy 
for sweeping updates). 
After I collect sufficient amount of reports (depending on whether it is a 
fix, update, are there any otyher problems reported and other stuff..) I mark 
the package stable and *close* the bug (its becoming now CLOSED, still 
keeping "minor status" of TEST-REQUEST although).

Just my 2 cents on how one can keep track of things without expanding number 
of bugs :).

George

On Friday 01 August 2003 11:31, Kumba wrote:
> Usually you file another bug in that case.  While not technically a
> "bug" bug, it still lets us keep track of those kind of needed updates.
>
> --Kumba



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list