From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1PmYFF-0006oD-8r for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 07 Feb 2011 21:03:37 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 3683B1C0A2; Mon, 7 Feb 2011 21:03:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 293E51C0A1 for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2011 21:02:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.12] (dvo94.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl [83.22.48.94]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: phajdan.jr) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C2B601B403E for ; Mon, 7 Feb 2011 21:02:46 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4D505DEC.2080608@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2011 22:02:36 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?IlBhd2XFgiBIYWpkYW4sIEpyLiI=?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:1.9.2.13) Gecko/20101207 Thunderbird/3.1.7 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] avoiding urgent stabilizations References: <4D501BA4.6040802@gentoo.org> <4D502114.2060006@gentoo.org> <1297100159.15824.21.camel@localhost.localdomain> <201102071845.15942.dilfridge@gentoo.org> <20110207205059.GA10939@bookie> In-Reply-To: <20110207205059.GA10939@bookie> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="------------enig8B73D850AA84C3C316DDAEDC" X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 68e47b883dc7a0f6a291cb6c2f77d0da This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 2440 and 3156) --------------enig8B73D850AA84C3C316DDAEDC Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 2/7/11 9:50 PM, Markos Chandras wrote: > My suggestion, as I said to fosdem, is to freeze, or take a > snapshot if you like, of the current tree, stabilize what you need to > stabilize, test the whole tree ( at least compile wise ) for a couple o= f > weeks and then replace the existing stable tree. Of course this require= s > automated script testing, hardware facilities etc etc that we don't hav= e > so claiming that stable tree is "stable" is quite wrong. This more thorough testing sounds really interesting. But do we really lack hardware resources? There are machines available for various arches at . I have at least a few chromium-related chroots on miranda, and I've never heard complaints, so it seems a few more chroots for arch testing wouldn't hurt= =2E Of course for testing bootability and whether X11 starts up correctly, etc we'd probably have to host some virtual machines, but better compile testing (for example for toolchain updates) would be a good start. Pawe=C5=82 --------------enig8B73D850AA84C3C316DDAEDC Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin) iEYEARECAAYFAk1QXfEACgkQuUQtlDBCeQI8ZACbB7OtkFtQqiHttvY4Icc2tfvM CYEAnjnqlNsV18XW/7c8B+ZctII3QING =1zfx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --------------enig8B73D850AA84C3C316DDAEDC--