From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ECIVJ-0006wX-25 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 05 Sep 2005 15:03:25 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j85ExYNG024159; Mon, 5 Sep 2005 14:59:34 GMT Received: from rwcrmhc11.comcast.net (rwcrmhc11.comcast.net [216.148.227.117]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j85EvpG1010158 for ; Mon, 5 Sep 2005 14:57:52 GMT Received: from [67.191.205.38] (unknown[67.191.205.38]) by comcast.net (rwcrmhc11) with ESMTP id <2005090515010001300avdape>; Mon, 5 Sep 2005 15:01:00 +0000 Message-ID: <431C5FC0.8020105@ieee.org> Date: Mon, 05 Sep 2005 11:09:52 -0400 From: "Nathan L. Adams" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (X11/20050722) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] tentative x86 arch team glep References: <20050904215931.53b9db51@snowdrop.home> <20050905102103.GA17734@pohl.domain_not_set.invalid> In-Reply-To: <20050905102103.GA17734@pohl.domain_not_set.invalid> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.92.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: ed2c3b68-2adf-4038-b961-99a7a00ef9a5 X-Archives-Hash: d5b1831821694e1a80d3cb9a722dd2dc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Tom Martin wrote: > I'm not sure I like this. I think it would be too slow. I'd rather have > a concept of maintainer arch (the reason I still like the old keyword > ordering, because there was at least *some* idea of maintainer arch. In > fact, I used to fiddle the keywords every now and again when I took over > a package and the maintainer arch changed). Policy, for a long time, has > been that no arch team should go stable ahead of a package maintainer > without his approval. This works fine. Now, some packages are going into > Portage without the x86 keyword (for example, viewglob, which I recently > committed. I don't have an x86 machine) and a non-x86 maintainer. All > that we need is an x86 arch team to do the same jobs as other > architectures: > > a) Test packages that aren't yet keyworded. > b) Keep keywords up-to-date -- imlate. Although imlate currently > compares against x86 by default, scanning x86 against a few other archs > isn't a major bottleneck. > c) Keep up with security bugs, with a proper security contact. Tester, I > believe you're filling this role at the moment? > d) Possibly arch testers. > > Maybe I'm seeing this all wrong, but the fact is, the number of packages > that need x86 arch team lovin' are pretty small, despite the number of > overall keyworded packages being large. I don't think the x86 arch team > needs to be very large: I think ten developers is plenty. I just don't > know what they'd be doing if there were more. > > Thoughts? > I took Kevin's 2) to mean that the arch team *developers* wouldn't do the actual testing; the arch team testers (a sub-group of the arch team) would do the testing. Is that correct? b) You could have imlate compare against the new -maint ~maint maint keywords (or whatever gets settled on). Having the 'maint' keyword would help with the 'no arch team should go stable ahead of a package maintainer without his approval' policy. I would structure it like this: i. Package maintainers control the 'maint' keyword. ii. Arch teams control their respective 'arch' keywords, but do not go stable before 'maint'. iii. Package maintainers could optionally keyword their packages as ~arch for their 'native platform'. That should keep the responsibilities clear and things moving, correct? Rule iii would also give you the same functionality as the maintainer arch without having the cludge keyword ordering. Nathan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDHF/A2QTTR4CNEQARAkqkAJ9/zn7Sa/Bj+H5ZKuWSyVl6RNeiVwCfQa+0 oH0hUWT025XDS8aEhrc9Cvg= =bSCC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list