public inbox for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "\"Paweł Hajdan, Jr.\"" <phajdan.jr@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] making the stable tree more up-to-date
Date: Mon, 21 Nov 2011 13:24:51 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4ECA4313.4020108@gentoo.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <201111211314.20292.dilfridge@gentoo.org>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1114 bytes --]

tl;dr - I plan to file stabilization bugs without CC-ing arches first so
that maintainers have chance to comment anyway. That'd still generate
large amount of bugs, and I was mostly asking about that.

On 11/21/11 1:14 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> Are the cited advances relevant for all stable arches, for the "major
> ones", or only for one of them?

My script has checked for x86 and amd64, but I could easily adapt it to
check for more.

> I would like to avoid the situation that we all file stable requests
> like mad and end up with all-but-one swamped arch teams and a
> neverending list of open stabilization bugs waiting for the last
> arch.

Right. My plan for now was to only CC x86 and amd64. I'm afraid other
archs wouldn't cope with the load and would be just very annoyed about
doing stabilizations for minor or revision bumps.

Note that I've only started thinking about this after my
batch-stabilization workflow proved to be effective. I think we can deal
with more stabilization bugs now, and that wouldn't be the case a few
months ago (we also have more ATs now).


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 203 bytes --]

  reply	other threads:[~2011-11-21 12:26 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-11-21  8:41 [gentoo-dev] making the stable tree more up-to-date "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
2011-11-21 11:48 ` Ulrich Mueller
2011-11-21 12:14 ` Andreas K. Huettel
2011-11-21 12:24   ` "Paweł Hajdan, Jr." [this message]
2011-11-21 12:27   ` Rich Freeman
2011-11-21 13:12 ` James Broadhead
2011-11-21 15:47 ` Brian Dolbec
2011-11-23 14:27 ` [gentoo-dev] " Torsten Veller
2011-11-24 15:17   ` "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
2011-11-24 16:35     ` Ian Stakenvicius
2011-11-24 17:12       ` Rich Freeman
2011-11-24 17:26         ` Pacho Ramos
2011-11-29 12:18         ` "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
2011-11-25 16:39 ` [gentoo-dev] " Thomas Kahle
2011-11-25 19:06   ` Mr. Aaron W. Swenson
2011-11-29 12:17   ` "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
2011-12-16 10:42 ` justin
2011-12-16 11:06   ` Agostino Sarubbo
2011-12-16 11:10     ` Anthony G. Basile
2011-12-16 11:21       ` Agostino Sarubbo
2011-12-16 11:46         ` justin
2011-12-18 10:59           ` [gentoo-dev] checking C*FLAGS used for build (was: making the stable tree more up-to-date) Michał Górny
2011-12-16 11:07   ` [gentoo-dev] making the stable tree more up-to-date Brian Harring
2011-12-16 13:27   ` "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."
2011-12-16 13:53     ` Rich Freeman
2011-12-16 14:05       ` Andreas K. Huettel
2011-12-16 18:40         ` Tim Harder
2011-12-16 14:12     ` justin
2011-12-17 15:25       ` "Paweł Hajdan, Jr."

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4ECA4313.4020108@gentoo.org \
    --to=phajdan.jr@gentoo.org \
    --cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox