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 1RbVge-0006se-NT for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:10:49 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7CF6521C169; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:10:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 184A621C0EA for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:10:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.3.7] (cpe-74-77-238-39.buffalo.res.rr.com [74.77.238.39]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: blueness) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 63534641F7 for ; Fri, 16 Dec 2011 11:10:16 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4EEB2715.5060806@gentoo.org> Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2011 06:10:13 -0500 From: "Anthony G. Basile" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111201 Thunderbird/8.0 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] making the stable tree more up-to-date References: <4ECA0EA3.8020407@gentoo.org> <4EEB2087.2050608@gentoo.org> <1769026.9R6ACMvGeL@devil> In-Reply-To: <1769026.9R6ACMvGeL@devil> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 0d584d1a-0556-4035-a4b0-79a14be9e457 X-Archives-Hash: 1100c1009e1b4f2fb55fe4bc2f42845e On 12/16/2011 06:06 AM, Agostino Sarubbo wrote: > On Friday 16 December 2011 11:42:15 justin wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I really like that you open all those bugs. But it makes no sense to add >> arches after a "time out". > Personally, I agree with have "more stable packages in tree", but I just point > out one thing. If me, or another arch tester find ebuild issue(s) and > maintainers does not care of it, makes no sense imho. > > I mark stable with a script and I'm uncomfortable to fix them. As Justin said, > all maintainers are responsible of their packages, so I'd prefer to not touch > other stuff. > > If you(for any developers) are busy and/or you can't fix them, feel free to > mail me or just give an "ack" via irc and I'll provide to fix. > > Regards > Agostino Hi ago, Does your script do any checking on the quality of the ebuild, eg that it respects C/LDFLAGS. If so, that's useful and would help package maintainers to better prepare their ebuilds for stabilization. And congrats on making dev :) -- Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D. Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened] E-Mail : blueness@gentoo.org GnuPG FP : 8040 5A4D 8709 21B1 1A88 33CE 979C AF40 D045 5535 GnuPG ID : D0455535