Aron Griffis wrote:

>Alin Nastac wrote:	[Wed Mar 09 2005, 05:57:15PM EST]
>  
>
>>No gentooer 
>>expects from a ~arch ebuild to be stable, so the sky would not fall if 
>>you made a mistake and release it under this keyword. When I hear "I 
>>cannot mark foo library as ~arch because I don't know how to test it" 
>>smells like excuse to me.
>>    
>>
>
>Earlier you said that you mark ebuilds stable after 30 days with no
>bugs.  Now you're suggesting that marking ~arch by mistake isn't a big
>deal.  I don't wish to beat up on you further, but this viewpoint can
>lead to stable ebuilds in the tree that don't even build over the
>course of one month (other than February ;-)
>
>  
>
I always test unpack/compile/install functionality of the ebuild before 
submittion, even if the submittion means only a script change.
So, from my point of view, every ebuild of mine at least must get 
installed. Of course, it doesn't mean that install process will succeed 
on any other machines than mine...
I'm only saying that no one will take your head if you do a mistake, but 
when you're not doing nothing because you are fearing of a mistake - 
this is problem. To err is human, you know.
As for marking an ebuild stable over a month, this is the ideal case. On 
average, I mark an ebuild stable on x86 after 2 months.

Again, I want to emphasize that I didn't break anything in portage tree, 
even if I have a "shoddy" attitude regarding Gentoo's QA.